►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
B
C
It
is
a
little
after
nine
o'clock.
I
think
we
have
a
majority
of
attendees
on
the
line,
so
we'll
get
started
with
with
our
customary
introductory
remarks.
C
C
C
C
405-297-2406
or
email
dot
me
show
okc.gov,
that's
m-a-r-k
dot
m-I-s-h-o-e
at
okc.gov
speakers
will
be
allowed
three
minutes
to
comment
advisory
team
members
will
be
allowed
to
ask
questions
or
comments
at
or
make
comments
at
any
time.
During
the
meeting
when
you
join
the
meeting
staff
will
meet
your
line,
whether
that's
by
phone
or
by
zoom,
and
we
ask
that
all
participants
keep
their
lines
on
mute
until
they
are
recognized
to
speak.
C
If
you
are
joining
by
phone
to
unmute
your
phone
press
star
six,
please
remember
that
only
one
person
can
be
heard
at
a
time
if
more
than
one
person
speaks.
We
will
not
hear
you
both
for
anyone
speaking
today,
including
advisory
team
members.
Please
identify
yourself
when
you
begin
to
speak
staff.
I
will
be
doing
additional
role
calls
as
necessary
to
confirm
attendance
throughout
the
meeting.
C
B
D
E
F
B
G
C
Hey,
thank
you
yeah.
I
know
a
lot
of
people
are
still
struggling
with
power
and
internet
and
property
issues
related
to
the
ice
storm
but,
like
I
explained
by
email,
we
did
want
to
go
ahead
and
have
this
meeting
it
is
being
recorded.
So
those
you
know
he
couldn't
make
it
we'll
still
have
the
benefit
of
the
information,
because
we
are,
we
are
trying
to
keep
on
schedule
as
best
we
can.
C
Can
can
everybody
see
my
screen
and
see
it
moving?
C
Yes,
okay,
the
so
today
and
we're
gonna
touch
again
on
the
team's
roles
and
responsibilities,
especially
because
there's
a
specific
responsibility
tied
to
this
meeting
and
we're
going
to
briefly
review
what
we
talked
about
at
our
last
meeting.
Then
I
will
the
consultant-
and
I
will
introduce
the
draft
of
the
proposed
sign
code
and
tell
you
what
to
look
for
as
you
move
through.
It
also
provides
you
with
instructions
on
how
you
can
review
it
online
and
make
comments.
C
C
So
we've
talked
all
along
that
one
of
the
primary
responsibilities
of
the
team
is
is
to
examine
the
technical
aspects
of
the
code
and
specifically
to
review
and
comment
on
drafts,
so
the
examining
key
elements
and
technical
aspects.
We
dug
pretty
deep
into
a
lot
of
that
over
the
last
three
meetings
and
now
we're.
Finally,
at
the
review
and
comment
stage.
C
So
you
may
have
noticed
in
various
pieces
of
correspondence.
Sometimes
I've
been
calling
this
meeting
that
we're
on
now
sat
number
four.
Sometimes
it's
4.5
because
sat
number
three
was
actually
two
meetings.
C
You
may
remember,
we
didn't
I
get
through
all
of
the
topics
of
the
first
one,
because
at
those
meetings
we
there
was
a
lot
of
very
useful
discussion
about
five
specific
topics:
billboards
pud
applications
poll,
science
measurement
emps,
and
we
took
we
did
a
lot
of
zoom
polling
to
gauge
everybody's
everybody's
feelings
on
the
various
topics
we
talked
about
our
proposed
approach
for
billboards.
C
C
C
If
one
or
more
billboards
in
another
area
was
removed,
that
if
we
could
create
an
incentive
that
would
help
us
reach
our
goal
of
reducing
billboards,
we
talked
about
a
lot
of
the
issues
relative
to
pds
and
spds
that
one
strategy
might
be
to
to
make
make
sure
that
they,
the
requirements
of
the
of
the
spud
or
pud,
can't
exceed
what
is
already
allowed
in
the
base
code.
C
We
talked
about
the
idea
of
a
master
sign
plan
that
could
be
included
with
the
put
or
spud
that
would
help
regulate
the
signs
for
those
we
talked
about
prohibiting
pulse
signs,
at
least
in
most
locations
other
than
freeways.
C
C
Rectangle
talked
about
how
to
reduce
height
and
to
tie
size
and
height
to
the
capacity
of
the
street
that
the
sign
is
on,
as
well
as
the
building
size
right
now.
For
the
most
part,
attached
signs
are
regulated
by
street
frontage
and
setback
from
the
street,
and
not
whether
or
not
it's
a
it's
a
busy
street
or
a
small
or
large
building
so
right
now,
a
small
building
can
have
a
relatively
large
sign.
C
All
that
has
has
manifested
in
the
new
sign
code,
but
I
did
want
to
back
up
so
after
the
last
two
sats
you
remember,
we
had
lots
of
discussion,
did
all
that
polling
after
that.
Jeff
me
marilyn
and
sarah
touched
base.
I
think,
with
with
most
of
the
individual
sat
members,
because
we
wanted
to
make
sure
if
somebody
answered,
for
example,
don't
like
it
under
a
certain
approach.
C
We
wanted
to
make
sure
we
understood
what
their
concerns
were,
so
that
we
could
address
it
in
some
way,
because
you
know
the
polling
was
just
a
snapshot,
but
it
didn't
allow
us
to
get
too
deep.
So
we
spent
a
lot
of
time
by
emailing
the
phone
talking
to
people
and
that
also
informed
the
what
you're
about
to
see
so
the
new
code,
just
the
the
broadest
description
of
it,
is
that
right
now
the
sign
size
and
the
number
of
signs
and
the
types
of
signs
you
can
have.
C
They
are
all
regulated
in
chapter
3,
article
5..
So
we're
proposing
to
replace
that
article
entirely
with
a
new
article
in
chapter
59
it'll
be
article
16,
because
that's
the
next
available
article,
the
new
code
will
regulate
signs
by
physical
feature.
We
talked
a
lot
about
that
that
we
had
to
move
to
a
content
neutral
approach,
but
that
there
were
still
lots
of
aspects
of
signs
that
we
can
regulate.
C
It
will
combine
all
of
the
regulations
for
signs
into
one
table
by
type
and
we'll
see
examples
of
that
here
in
a
second
that's
to
make
make
it
easy
to
find
for
anyone
reviewing
the
code
one
table
and
in
that
one
table
for
attached
signs
for
freestanding
signs,
and
that
one
table
is
everything
they
need
to
know
about
whether
or
not
their
sign
is
allowed.
How
big
it
can
be,
how
tall
it
can
be,
how
many
they
can
have
and
then
a
goal
suggested
in
the
phase.
C
So
then
kind
of
the
next
level
of
detail
that
you
need
to
know
about
is
that
many
provisions
have
not
changed
but
have
been
relocated,
and
that
was
perhaps
more
difficult
than
it
might
sound,
because
the
existing
code
is
organized
completely
different.
Like
I
said,
a
lot
of
it
is
regulated
on
accessory
and
non-accessory,
but
for
the
most
part,
we've
kept
the
size
and
number
thresholds
the
same,
if
not
very
similar,
because
one
of
our
goals,
all
along,
has
been
to
minimize
non-conformities,
and
I
know
several
people
in
the
group
were
concerned
about
that.
C
You
can
see
them
here
and
as
long
as
as
well
as
the
all
the
different
types
of
signs
that
are
included
in
it,
for
example,
attached
signs
or
not
just
wall
signs
that
includes
banners,
murals
window
signs,
roof
signs.
C
So
the
bricktown
design
district
was
the
only
design
district
that
was
had
already
been
moved
to.
That
was
all
contained
in
chapter
three,
so
it
has
all
been
moved
to
this
new
article.
The
other
design
districts
rely
they're,
either
overlays
or
their
base
district
like
downtown,
relies
on
existing
provisions
for
commer.
You
know
commercial
or
o1
or
o2.
C
We
also
are
addressing
murals
in
this
effort.
As
some
of
you
may
be
aware
that
our
office
of
arts
and
cultural
affairs
has
been
working
for
years
with
various
stakeholders
and
task
forces
trying
to
make
the
murals
process
easier
and
more
predictable
throughout
the
city,
and
we
think
we've
done
that.
C
So
the
new
code,
when
you
see
it
and
and
it
will
live
on
the
web,
it's
a
web-based
thing
just
like
unicode.
If,
if
you're
used
to
going
to
media
code
to
check
your
zoning
requirements,
so
it
will
live
online,
also
we'll
be
circulating
after
this
meeting
and
in
the
future,
a
pdf
copy
for
anyone
who
finds
that
easier
to
read
and
mark
up.
I
C
Yes,
I'm
going
to
demonstrate
that
towards
the
end
of
the
meeting
very
good.
C
The
one
thing
I
did
want
to
back
up
to
was
was
you
know
as
we're
going
through,
so
I'm
going
to
go
through
and
show
you
exactly
how
we
addressed
exactly
what
points,
and
I
know
some
of
you
have
already
noticed
that
some
things
have
not
been
addressed
in
the
way
you
thought
they
might
have
been
since
we
left
the
last
sat
meeting
and
and
there's
a
couple
reasons
for
that.
C
C
So
we've
been
asked
to
specifically
include
a
certain
directions
so,
but
I
do
want
to.
I
hope
everybody
believes
me
when
I
say
every
every
bit
of
input
that
we
have
ever
had
throughout
this
process
has
informed
some
aspect
of
it
and
you
might
not
see
your
specific
comment
literally
translated,
but
but
every
comment
help
helps
us
helps
me
at
least
cross-reference
and
scrutinize
what
our
intent
was
and
if
we're
communicating
it
not
clearly
so.
J
Yeah
lisa,
let
me
just
add
on
a
little
bit
more,
I
mean
I
think
you
said
it
well,
but
at
the
same
time,
if
you
know
we,
we
still
want
to
hear
feedback.
So
if,
if
you
have
any
kind
of
comment
like
you
know,
why
is
this
the
way
it
is?
You
know,
feel
free
to
ask
us
questions
and
at
least
we'll
cover
this
a
little
bit
later,
but
you
can
ask
questions
in
in
as
you're
reviewing
it.
You
can
make
comments
say.
J
J
Because,
yes,
what
we
like
lisa
said,
we
we
incorporated
everybody's
comments
to
the
extent
that
you
know
we
were
able,
but
there
may
be
a
better
way,
and
so
you
know
we're
we're
obviously
open
to
to
to
better
ways
to
do
things,
but
we
think
we've
captured
what
the
policy
committee
and
the
stakeholder
advisory
team
wanted
kind
of
the
majority,
what
what
people
felt
should
be
in
the
code.
J
There
were
a
couple
of
exceptions
where
some
policy
committee
members
felt,
like
you
know:
maybe
there
there
were
one
or
two
items
that
were
kind
of
borderline,
but
some
people
felt
strongly
enough
about
them
that
we
that
we
put
them
in-
and
you
know
those
will-
you
know
it'll
all
work
itself
out
as
we
go
through
the
process.
C
Yes,
this
is
this.
This
is
a
point
in
time
of
the
process,
it's
a
significant
point
in
time,
but
there
is
still
quite
a
bit
of
process
to
go.
C
So
with
that,
I
will
start
going
through
some
specific
changes.
I
wanted
to
call
to
your
attention.
C
Overall,
I
hope
you
have
seen
by
the
meeting
packet
that
went
out
that
I've
tried
to
create
this
presentation
as
a
kind
of
a
user's
guide
to
the
new
code,
so
I've
included
excerpts
from
pages
of
the
new
code.
I've
highlighted
or
underlined
exactly
which,
which
part
of
it
is
addressed,
is
addressing
which
approach,
for
example,.
J
And
let
me
clarify
that
when
those
were
areas
that
were
specifically
asked
for
by
members
of
the
policy
committee,
so
you
know
we
we
can.
You
know,
tweak
those.
If
you
know
councilwoman
nice,
for
example,
you
want
to
tweak
the
boundaries
on
that
I-35
one
or
you
know,
lake
hefner
parkway
the
the
boundaries
are
specified
in
the
ordinance.
You
know
that
that
lake
here
from
the
parkway,
for
example,
was
one
those
a
response
to
recent
events
going
on
over
there
and
and
and
then
the
downtown
scenic
highway.
J
C
Right
and
jeff,
we
also-
I
don't
remember
if
all
of
these
criteria
are
in
the
existing
code,
but
if,
if
other
policy
makers
are
considering
suggesting
other
corridors
to
be
added,
I'll,
have
a
list
of
criteria
to
evaluate
those
against
and
not
just
now,
but
in
the
future.
J
These
actually
these
criteria
are
are
new.
I
think
the
old
code,
just
kind
of
said:
here's
we
have
seen
in
corridors
and
or
a
corridor,
and
here
it
is,
we
wanted
to
make
it
clear
kind
of
why
what
makes
it
or
what
could
make
a
corridor
scenic?
You
know
if
anybody
wanted
to
add
something
and
down
the
road.
You
know
ten
years
from
now.
You
know
they
can
kind
of
look
at
this
and
and
that's
kind
of
the
justification
for
for
for
some
of
these,
for
all
of
them.
C
Okay,
so
billboards
scenic
corridors,
we
talked
about
increasing
the
spacing
of
them
and
measuring
that
spacing
on
both
sides
of
the
highway.
I'm
going
to
go
through
these
pretty
quickly
to
make
sure
we
get
through
it,
and
if
anybody
wants
me
to
back
up
later,
I'm
happy
to
credits
for
relocation
mark.
Do
you
want
to
talk
a
little
bit
more
in
detail
about
this
portion.
I
Yes,
what
this
does
is
it
allows
somebody
to
relocate
an
existing
billboard
to
a
location
that
is
closer
to
another
billboard
than
our
new
allowance,
where,
as
lisa
mentioned,
we're
going
from
1200
to
1500
feet.
But
you
can
relocate
a
billboard
now
to
a
new
location
within
that
300
foot
spacing
if
you,
if
you'd
like,
but
you've,
got
to
remove
the
billboard
at
your
location
and
one
other
billboard.
J
This
accident,
you
could
you
you
all,
might
recall
the
way
this
is
kind
of
a
replacement
for
what
we
referred
to
previously
as
the
cap
and
replace
concept
that
we
talked
about,
and
so
we
we
got
some
great
feedback
about
that,
and
what
we
think
is
that,
and
there
were
a
lot
of
people
that
were
for
it,
some
people
that
were
unconvinced
or
against
it
and
based
on
our
feed
the
feedback
we
got.
We
think
this
is
a
good
proposal
that
you
guys
can
consider
because
it
it
might
help.
J
At
least
we
hope
that
it
that
it
works
well
for
both
sides.
You
know
it
provides
an
incentive
for
a
billboard
company
to
to
be
able
to
locate.
You
know
to
be
able
to
have
a
little
bit
of
extra
leeway
and
on
the
spacing
on
the
condition
that
they,
you
know,
remove
a
billboard
somewhere
else.
So
you
know
it's
a
kind
of
a
win-win.
That's
how
we
tried
to
structure
it.
You
know
we
can.
You
know
talk
about
this
some
more,
but
this
is
our.
This
is
kind
of
our
our.
J
C
H
C
C
Absolutely
it's
open
for
discussion.
We
in
a
previous
meeting
mark.
I
think
that's
what
you
were
asking.
We
have
not
talked
about
those
in
great
detail
and
nobody
brought
those
up
as
a
specific
concern.
J
Yeah,
let
me
clarify
a
good
question
mark,
no
decisions
have
been
made.
I
mean
this
is
this?
Is
the
first
cut,
so
you
know
we're
looking
for
feedback
so
yeah.
We
discussed
a
lot
of
things
in
our
previous
meetings,
but
that
is
a
great
example
of
one
we
didn't
discuss.
So
you
know
we
we
have
staff
and
our
consultant
have
kind
of
filled
in
filled
in
the
gaps.
J
You
know
so
there's
a
lot
of
there's
a
lot
of
content
in
the
ordinance
that
you'll
you'll
want
to
dig
into
everybody
will
and
we
would
love
to
get
your
feedback.
You
know
the
decisions
won't
be
made
until
the
council
votes
on
it,
and
so
the
council
members,
you
know-
and
staff
of
course,
want
to
to
see
and
hear
your
feedback
on
any
and
all
details
of
this
code.
J
I
think,
probably,
I
think
what
we're
asking
for
now
is
and
lisa
will
describe,
but
now
that
the
code
is
is
a
draft
form.
We
have
a
nice
little
website
where
you
can
go
there
just
make
your
comments
and
that
way
people
can
review
it
at
their
leisure.
They
can
see
your
comments
and
respond
to
them.
Staff
can
can
see
your
comments
and
respond
to
them.
J
So
you
know
people
that
weren't
able
to
make
it
this
morning
can
can
hear
what
you
have
to
say
as
well,
so
that
that's
kind
of
the
plan
for
now
this
morning
we
mostly
just
kind
of
wanted
to
kind
of
present
it
see
if
there
are
any
questions
on
how
we're
moving
forward
and
we're
hopeful
that
we
can
capture
your
con,
not
that
we
wanna,
you
know,
don't
wanna
hear
from
you.
J
J
I
I'd
have
to
go
check
within
encode.
I
I
think
you
can,
but
I
don't
want
to
say
for
sure
I
know
the
editing
function
I
think
allows
you
to,
but
I
would
have
to
go
back
and
check
with
them.
Okay,.
H
C
J
J
The
other
thing
you
could
do
is
put
a
link
in
your
in
your
comments.
If
you'd
like
to
do
that,
people
can
just
kind
of
go
there
and
see
what
you've
got
in
mind.
So
we'll
have
those
options,
but
we'll
also
like
mark
said
check
and
see.
If
we
have
the
ability
to
put
photos
in
the
comments,
I
don't
think
we
can
but
we'll
check.
K
Hey
lisa:
this
is
bill
condon
with
lamar.
Can
you
hear
me.
K
K
Okay
also-
and
this
may
be
a
question
for
mark
on
the
execution
of
relocations-
so
is
there
an
ability
based
off
of
of
square
footage,
that
you
could
turn
in
smaller
signs
that
may
be
located
on
the
surface
streets
to
provided
that
it
meets
all
the
other
requirements
to
get
a
permit
located
on
the
freeway.
I
Bill,
I'm
not
sure
I
understand
your
question.
Are
you
asking
whether
somebody
can
take
a
smaller
billboard?
Yes,
that's
current
and
then
relocate
it
to
a
new
location
and
and
erect
a
larger
billboard.
K
Yeah
so,
for
example,
if
it's
based
off
of
square
footage,
we
operate
some
smaller
signs
that
I
would
refer
to
as
the
surface
streets
that
are
non-freeway
and
if
I,
if
I
removed
a
handful
of
of
those
that
I
could
turn
in,
would
I
be
able
to
secure
a
interstate
location,
a
672
on
a
freeway
on
a
freeway
spot.
I
We
have
is
the
the
relocated,
billboard
can't
be,
and
you
can't
relocate
to
a
scenic
corridor,
but
any
you
can
relocate
to
any
other
eligible
freeway.
So.
L
I
One
restriction,
but
I
think
you're
asking
an
additional
question
and
I
I
think
what
you're
asking
is,
if
I
are
we
just
counting
one
billboard
as
one
billboard
right
and
so
I
can
take
a
billboard.
That's
currently
much
smaller.
I
Maximum
allowance
and
then
go
put
in
a
much
larger
billboard.
You
know
up
to
obviously
up
to
the
maximum
allowance
in
in
a
different
location,
and
I
don't
I
don't
think
we
allow
for
that
in
the
new
regulation.
I
I
think
we
it's
it's
a
square,
I
think
it's
a
square
foot
to
square
foot
basis,
but
I'll
need
to
go
back.
It's
it's
a
good
question
I'll,
go
back
and
check
the
language
just
sure
I
think
that's
what
the
city
would
want,
but
I'll
double
check
just
to
make
sure
that's.
J
A
great
comment
comment,
mr
condon,
I
mean
we
can
you
know
if
it's
if
it's
still
not
clear
by
the
time
this
code
gets
released
for
public
comment.
You
know
you
have
the
opportunity
to
to.
You
know
drill
into
that,
or
you
know,
of
course,.
I
To
my
own
question-
and
I
I
knew
it
was
in
there-
the
the
replace
billboard
has
to
meet
the
original
sign
area,
but
only
up
to
672
square
feet.
So
if
your
original
sign
is
700
square
feet,
you
can
get
672
at
the
new
location.
I
J
Bill
we
will
we'll
be
what
we'd
like
to
do
for
for
this,
and
I
maybe
jump
ahead
at
least
a
little
bit,
but
the
stakeholder
advisory
team
will
have
access
to
this
online
commenting
function,
but
we
can
give
you
and
anybody
else
who's
interested
in
a
pdf
copy
so
that
you
can,
you
know
you
can
have
it
and
review
it
and
then
when
when,
of
course,
the
stakeholder
advisory
team
is
done
with
it,
we'll
put
it
out
for
public
review
and
then
at
that
point
anybody
can.
J
You
know
of
course,
comment
on
we
and
we
hope
for
a
lot
of
good,
in-depth
kind
of
testing
and
questions
and
comments
from
the
sign
industry.
Very.
M
I
M
I
M
Question
does
the
does
the
new
code
and,
if
I'm
getting
ahead
of
you,
forgive
me,
but
this
is
just
the
billboard
section,
so
I
thought
I'd
ask
it
is:
have
we
dealt
yet
with
c3
signs
that
are
undeveloped,
that
you
know
you
know
what
I'm
asking
lisa.
So
that's
our.
C
B
C
C
J
Yeah
the
the
reason
for
that
we
had
a
and
lisa
correct
me
if
I
misstate
this,
but
we
had
a
a
very
late
comment
from
our
legal
staff
from
the
municipal
counselor's
office
that
they
don't
feel
like
they
don't
feel
like
we
can
actually
so
the
way
it
is
now
they
actually
don't
feel
like
that's
something
that
that's
enforceable
or
that
we
can
actually
do
so.
J
What
our
original
intent
was
just
to
say.
Well,
you
know
you
can't
you
can't
kind
of
subvert
the
process
with
with
a
pud
or
an
spd,
but
then,
with
this
new
information
from
legal,
it
basically
means
we
just
have
to
not
allow
it,
because
we
once
it
is
in
c3,
apparently
we
can't
ever
get
rid
of
it.
So.
G
I
this
is
janice
powers.
That
is
big
news
and
I
think
we're
gonna
need
to
hear
from
legal
about
that.
I'm
going
to
want
to
really
dig
into
that
with
them,
because
every
billboard,
that's
on
c3
property,
undeveloped,
c3
property
right
now
was
permitted
with
the
understanding
that
it
would
be
removed
when
the
property
was
developed.
So
if
that's
something
that
we're
just
gonna,
you
know
throw
up
our
hands
and
quit
on.
I'm
gonna
really
need
to
understand
why.
J
Yeah
that
that
is
a
big
deal,
you're
right
and,
like
I
said,
that's
that's
late
coming
information,
so
we
didn't
want
to.
You
know
postpone
this
because
of
that,
but
it
is
something
that
that
we
are
going
to
be
having
conversations
with
legal
about
because
you're
right
janice,
that's
it's
been
around
for
a
long
time
and
that's
always
been
the
understanding,
and
so
that's
a
that's
kind
of
a
big
deal
if
it
if
it
changes.
I
Well,
I
think
what
one
of
the
things
that
addresses
that,
though,
is
now
we
are
requiring
and
I'm
sorry
lisa.
I
know
I'm
jumping
ahead
too
we're
now
requiring
all
puds
and
svds
to
comply
with
the
underlying
regulations,
which
would
now
not
allow
billboards
in
c3.
You
can't
put
or
spud
your
way
out
of
that,
but.
G
M
Are
there
are
there
not?
Are
there
non-policy
members
that
are
on
the
call
today
that
have
thoughts
or
comments
about
that
from
the
development
community
that
we
have
not
heard
from?
I?
I
would
personally
love
to
hear
from
somebody
who's,
not
on
those
committees
as
to
their
opinion
about
that
change
and
how
that
might
impact
them
specifically
or
indirectly,
even.
C
H
Does
it
doesn't
impact
me,
but
I'm
trying
to
understand
it
so
on
when
these
spuds
were
done
previously,
with
an
understanding
that
those
billboards
would
be
removed?
Was
that
documented
somewhere
in
the
approval
process,
because
if
that
was
documented,
that
it
was
temporarily,
it
shouldn't,
be
an
issue.
J
Well,
what
what
so?
What
what
what's
been
happening-
and
a
recent
example
is-
is
up
on
memorial
and
just
just
west
of
portland
a
little
bit
about
a
mile
west
of
portland.
But
there
was,
you
know,
there's
an
empty
parcel
and
zone
c3
and
the
code
says
now
you
can
put
a
billboard
there,
but
once
once
it's
developed,
the
billboard
has
to
go
away.
J
That
was
that's
what
those
that's,
what
the
current
code
says
in
some
cases,
folks
have
come
through
later
and
and
and
kind
of
got
around
that
by
just
allowing
it
and
say:
well,
we
want
to
develop
this
property,
but
we
want
to
get
rid
of
that
that
that
code
stipulation
and
still
keep
our
billboards
so
they've
been.
J
I
don't
know
how
many
cases
I
know
of
that
one
recently,
but
it's
it's
happened
a
time
or
two
or
more,
where
they've
been
allowed
to
keep
the
billboard
as
part
of
their
hud
or
spud
and
and
also
develop.
You
know
a
strip
mall
or
something
so
but
again.
So
that's
what
the
code
currently
says
and
when
legal
came
back
just
a
couple
days
ago
and
said
well,
we
don't
actually
think
that
we
can
enforce
that
based
on
state
law.
J
F
What
we
were
saying
was
that
in
the
general
code
requirements
going
forward,
we
don't
think
that
that
can
be
a
conditional
condition
placed
upon
that
use,
because
under
the
statute
it
just
allows
you
to
terminate
non-conforming
signs
for
specific
reasons
and
that's
if
it's
abandoned
for
more
than
two
years
yeah
or
you
can't.
You
know
like,
of
course
enlarge
it
or
anything
like
that,
but
so
we're
listening.
G
Yes,
this
janus
powers
so
you're
not
saying
that
the
currently
existing
billboards
on
c3
property
that
got
their
permits
with
the
stipulation
that
once
the
property
was
developed
c3
once
it
was
developed
that
they
had
to
take
those
signs
down.
You're,
not
saying
that
that
conditional
permit
is
somehow
not
not
enforceable.
F
I
don't,
I
don't
think
so
at
this
point
I
will
go
verify
that
for
sure,
but
I
think
that
would
be
non-conform.
I
mean
you
know.
What's
existing
now
would
be
non-conforming,
you
know,
however,
they
got
their
permit
and
under
those
conditions,
I
think
what
we're
saying
is
going
forward.
F
J
Yeah,
what
I'm
talking
about
is
if
we
have
us
if
we
have
a
billboard
on
a
vacant
piece
of
c3
property
right
now.
That's
that's
that's
legal
and
it
will
be
legal
unless
we
change
this.
So
if
we,
if
we
say
it's
no
longer
permitted,
if
we
do
this
strikethrough
the
way
it's
shown
here,
then
it
would
be
non-conforming.
G
Whether
it's,
whether
it's
non-conforming,
this
is
a
critical,
critical
point,
whether
it's
non-conforming
and
therefore
allowed
to
remain,
even
though
the
property
is
developed
or
whether
they
have
to
comply
with
the
condition
of
their
permit,
which
is
that
if
the
property
is
developed,
the
sign
comes
down
which
one
of
those
two
things
is
where,
where
we're
going
to
be
as
to
currently
existing
billboards
is
a
is
a
big
issue.
We
need
to
have
an
answer
to
this.
C
Okay,
so
yes
thank
you,
everybody,
the
so
mark
just
mentioned,
and
I'll
just
pre-mention
quickly
about
so
one
approach
was
to
specify
that
puds
or
spd
applications
can't
exceed
the
district
regulations.
The
existing
district
regulations
talked
about
billboards
and
we'll
provide
more
information
to
everybody.
On
that,
then
we
talked
about
the
master
site.
Oh
I
don't
know
mark.
Did
we
talk
much
about
the
master
sign
plan.
C
I
Yeah
they,
the
master
sign
plan,
is,
is
going
to
it's
a
new
requirement
that
we're
putting
into
the
code
to
encourage
people
to
master
basically
coordinate
their
signs
with
the
character
of
the
rest
of
the
development
in
terms
of
materials
and
display
in
in
everything
else.
I
That
goes
along
with
it,
so
there's
an
increase
in
sign
area
and
sine
height
you
get
by
going
through
that
process.
I
So
you
know
it's:
it's
both
a
a
new
requirement
for
puds
spds
and
larger
developments,
and
but
it
also
gives
us
some
flexibility
and
gives
the
sign
designers
some
flexibility
as
well.
B
C
E
E
C
E
E
Don't
have
tenants
in
mind,
and
I
think
the
9000
broadway
project
is
a
great
example
of
that,
where
we
re-zoned
that
six
seven
years
ago-
and
they
just
came
back
now
with
their
final
sign
package,
because
you
know
they
real,
they
figured
out
who
the
tenants
were,
and
you
know
one
took
up
a
massive
amount
of
property
and
so
that
reduced
the
number
of
tenants.
D
J
Thanks
mark
I
mean,
but
the
intent
was
to
to
have
us
a
tool
through
this
master
sign
plans
that
would
allow
you
know
flexibility
and
allow
people
to
do
some
things
that
they're
currently
doing
with
the
pud
and
spod
process,
but
allow
that
flexibility
without
having
to
do
a
putters
bud
so
so
yeah.
I
think
yeah.
That's
good
comment,
we'll
we'll
look
at
that.
K
You
know
leading
up
to
this
in
in
in
the
enactment
of
the
moratorium
regarding
pods
and
spuds
for
non-accessory
signs
or
billboards
so
leading
leading
up
to
that
there
were
opportunities
of
putting
a
application
in
for
the
sole
purpose
of
of
allowing
for
a
new
sign,
so
kind
of
walking
through
that
process
has
anything
changed
or
how
does
it
reflect
now
with
this
with,
with
with
what
you
guys
are
enacting
now,
so
will
there
be
an
ability
to
go
in
and
for
the
sole
purpose
of
getting
a
billboard
which
otherwise
would
not
allow
it?
J
Oh,
no
and
there's
a
some
specific
language
in
there.
I
don't
know
if
we
have
it
on
our
slides
here,
but
yeah.
That
was.
That
was
one
of
the
things
that
we
talked
about
with
the
stakeholder
advisory
team
that
we
wanted
to
tighten
up
so
that
it
could
not
be
something
that
you
would
use
to
circumvent
and
that's
why
again,
why
we
have
the
master
scion
plan
language
in
there.
B
C
Okay,
thank
you.
Everyone,
so
pole
signs.
I've
already
heard
from
several
people
about
the
pole.
Signs
concerns,
but
this
draft
proposes
prohibiting
them,
except
for
freeways.
Freeways
are
defined
in
the
sign
code
and
divided
arterial
highway
with
access
with
limited
access
access,
via
only
on
and
off
ramps.
So
interstate
highways
lake,
kempner
parkway.
L
C
Not
northeast
expressway,
for
example,
so
they
they
fall
signs
would
be
significant
in
a
significant
area
of
the
city,
and
it
is
your
you
might.
When
you
look
at
the
code
language,
you
might
be
looking
for
a
sentence
that
says
poll
signs
are
prohibited.
C
G
C
Mark
do
you
want
to
do
you
want
to
address
just
this
has
come
up
on
on
several
things
like
to
what
extent
can
you
say
something
is
not
allowed.
There's
lots
of
things
not
allowed.
We've
tried
to
be
careful
of
just
of
not
not
trying
to
identify
everything,
that's
not
allowed,
but
mark.
Do
you
have
another
way
to
explain
it.
I
C
C
Then
there
are
so
so
current,
so
currently
there
are
there's
a
definition
for
freestanding
signs
and
freestanding
signs
are
ground
or
monument
signs
freestanding
signs
are
not
a
pulse.
Sign
is
not
an
allowed
freestanding
sign.
So
it's
fun
to
point
that
out
as
you're
going
through
the.
C
Code,
any
other
questions
about
pulsar.
N
C
J
J
There's
no
specific
process
outlined
in
the
code.
If
somebody
wanted
to
do
that,
it
would
just
be
you
know
something
they
could
approach
their
city
council
person
about
or
planning.
Commissioner.
I
Yes,
you,
and
there
are
some
criteria
that
were
added
and
I
think
we
may
have
covered
that
earlier.
Didn't
we
lisa
about
what
oh,
okay,
it
comes
later
about
what
qualifies
as
a
scenic
designation.
C
Okay,
so
measurement
and
allocation.
B
C
B
C
Example,
you
see
is
for
ground
signs,
but
there's
another
table
for
freestanding
signs.
The
and
another
table
for
emd
signs
for
all
the
sign
types.
So
this
one
table
you
define
what
you're
allowed
you
read
across
on
the
top
for
your
zoning
district,
and
then
you
read
across
on
the
left
for
your
street
type
designation.
C
These
street
type
designations
are
from
plan
okc
and
based
on
those
two
parameters
you
can
find.
You
know.
The
first
question
everybody
has
is:
is
my
sign
allowed?
Is
it
permitted?
Yes,
no
yeah
one
question
is:
is
it
is
it
allowed?
The
second
is
usually,
does
it
require
a
permit
and
from
then
on
we
get
into
the
detail
of
how
big
can
it
be?
C
I
Certainly
I
mean
we've
carried
forward
one
one
facet
of
the
existing
regulations
in
which
your
science
size
is
tied
to
your
frontage.
Basically,
so
you
know
the
more
frontage
you
have
the
more
signer
you
get
up
to
a
maximum
before
that
maximum
we've
tied
that
to
street
type
and
the
the
reason
why
there's
several
reasons
why
I
mean
one
is
streets
are
form-givers,
I
mean
they,
they
shape
the
character
of
a
community
and
secondly,
they,
the
the
more
intense
your
street
classification
is
so
the
the
closer
you
are
to
an
arterial.
I
If
your
signs
are
smaller,
they're
harder
to
read
people,
you
know,
make
aberrant
driving
maneuvers
to
to
slow
down
and
see
the
signs
and
that
sort
of
thing,
and
so
it's
common
practice
and
it
makes
common
sense
to
allow
larger
signs
on
those
streets
and
so
and
by
the
same
token,
if
you're,
a
residential
area,
if
you're
on
a
main
street
or
some
other
mixed
use,
designation
a
more
walkable
setting,
for
example,
where
signs
are
naturally
going
to
be
smaller
and
we
want
them
to
be
smaller
because
that
that's
the
character
of
that
area,
the
the
sign
sizes
reduce,
and
so
they
scale
up
based
on
that
and
they
also
scale
up
all
the
way
to
700
square
feet
in
your
more
intense
zoning
district
designations.
I
Just
like
you
do
today,
so
we
were
sort
of
walking
that
balance
between
you
know
doing
the
right
thing
with
plan
okc
and
with
what
we're
told
by
the
committee,
but
not
making
a
radical
change
and-
and
you
know
what
people
would
get
today
with
their
sign
package.
C
Okay,
so
we
talked
about
size
and
type
and
the
same
thing
about
the
height
is
tied
to
street
type.
We
would
as
you're,
going
through
the
code,
so
our
mark
white
did
a
good
job
of
trying
to
transpose
our
existing
parameters
into
this
new
system,
but
we
would
love
all
the
feedback
we
can
get
on.
If
you
think
we
got
it
right
on
the
size
and
height
thresholds,.
B
M
M
M
So
if
I,
if
I've
got
if
if
to
use
mark's
example,
if
I've
got
mark
zitsau's
example,
if
I've
got,
let's
assume
that
development
was
on,
you
know,
may
avenue
again
just
stick
with
the
street
typology
and
I've
got
1200
feet
of
frontage
there.
So
I've
got
a
major
development.
The
code's
going
to
limit
me
to
100
square
foot
of
signage,
150
square
feet
of
signage.
C
Yeah,
I
don't
think
I
don't
have
the
but
note
on
showing
up
here.
I
don't
think
we
cap
it,
but
I
will
check,
but
I
just
want
to
point
out
it
does
recognize
that
there
may
be
some
very
large
sites
that
need
more
than
one
sign.
J
C
J
G
Can
I
this
is
janice
powers?
I
want
to
just
be
clear
about
this,
so
you're
not
talking
about
you're,
actually
talking
about
the
number
of
signs,
not
square
footage,
I
mean
the
idea
that
you
would
have
you
know
five
signs,
as
opposed
to
maybe
just
one
or
two
larger
signs
is
there?
Is
there
something
about
that
that
we
ought
to
tweak
a
little
bit?
Should
it
be
a
square
footage
consideration
rather
than
an
actual
physical
num
number
of
actual
physical
signs,
or
at
least
the
option
to
do
some
trade-off?
There
certainly.
C
M
That's
not
that's
not
practical,
I
mean
in
a
lot
of
instances.
That's
just
simply
not
practical.
I
really
hope
some
of
my
other.
You
know
some
of
the
other
folks
that
are
involved
in
development.
Here
will
speak
up,
but
you,
when
you
start
out
with
a
project,
that's
got
1500
feet
of
frontage
and
you
start
to
carve
it
up
into
commercial
development.
You
have
no
idea
in
a
lot
of
instances,
what's
going
to
be
there,
so
you
know
you
need
to
have
something
objective
that
you
can
use
to
plan
to.
M
So
when
you
take
a
site
out
to
chick-fil-a
to
show
them
what
you're
proposing
chick-fil-a
can
see
by
right.
What
they're
entitled
to
this
idea
that
you're,
going
to
have
a
constant
series
of
trade-offs
is
not
a
good
idea.
We
should
have
an
objective
baseline
that
these
people
can
see
that
they're
entitled
to
have.
So
I
I
like
the
idea,
I'm
not
saying
this
is
perfect,
but
I
like
the
idea
that
it
is
clear
about
what
you
could
have
instead
of
what
we
have
now,
which
is
this
sort
of
constant
debate
about.
M
I
think
they
should
have
the
flexibility,
but
I
think
they
should
be
able
to
see
by
right
what
they
have.
So
I
don't
like
the
idea
that
we
have
this
this,
that
we're
going
to
create
a
code.
That's
going
to
allow
for
these
trade-offs
in
the
future.
Like
just
show
people
what
they're
going
to
be
entitled
to
by
right,
if
200
feet
of
frontage
is
the
number
to
get
an
extra
sign.
M
Let
them
see
they
have
an
extra
sign,
because
in
the
in
in
the
instance
where
you
have
a
9,
000,
broadway
type
project,
where
the
whole
project
changes
based
on
who
comes,
then
the
developer
could
always
come
back
and
say
hey.
I
I
got
five
signs.
I
don't
need
them.
What
I
really
need
to
get
this
deal
done
is
two
signs
that
are
x
number
of
footage
and
it's
above
this
code
requirement.
G
G
G
I
get
x
square
square
feet
that'd,
be
my
first
sign,
I'm
entitled
that
by
right
plus
and
you
know
x,
square
feet
per
200
square
feet
of
footage
so
that
they
can
decide
whether
they
want
one
larger
sign,
because
this
is
only
going
to
be
one
thing,
or
it's
only
going
to
be
two
things
as
opposed
to
it's
going
to
be
five
things.
I
think
it
would
be
nice
if
the
developer
had
that
flexibility
and
they
don't
have
to
come
back
to
us
to
make
that
decision.
M
Yeah,
I
I
would
love
to
hear
from
some
of
the
people
in
the
development
community.
I
don't.
I
don't
want
to
be
the
one
monopolizing
that
side
of
the
conversation,
but
I
would
love
to
hear
the
feedback
on
how
you
know
this
sort
of
an
arrangement
would
affect
them
and
how
it
would
alter
their
from
their
experience
their
you
know.
Their
projects.
C
Yeah
and
scott
I'll
say
what
you're
describing
is
exactly
what
what
we
need
from
from
you-
and
I
know
clay
has
similar
concerns
yeah
like
janice.
I
don't
do
you
know
big
retail
developments
anywhere
in
the
city.
I
don't
so.
We
need
the
experts
on
the
call
to
tell
us,
you
know:
did
all
of
these
thresholds
be
increased?
I
know
some
people
to
some
people.
You
know
you
can't
have
too
much
signage
when
we
did
a
we
looked.
C
We
took
the
new
code
and
we
did
a
few
tests
against
signs
across
the
city
and
a
variety
we
did
them
in
c3.
We
did
them
in
i2.
We
did
them
across
districts
across
street
types
and
in
most
cases
applicants
were
not
using
up
their
sign
allowance
so
like
they
would
be
allowed
150
square
feet,
but
they
were
only
installing
a
40
square
foot
sign.
C
So
we
were
pretty
quickly
able
to
realize
hey.
The
existing
code
had
obviously
had
a
generous
allowance,
but
I
you
know
if
it
is
clear
to
you
guys
that
these
numbers
are
too
restrictive.
Please
let
us
know.
G
G
J
Yeah,
joel
has
a
comment
that
you
know
his
question
is:
can
your
concerns
be
addressed
in
the
master
sign
plan
and
I
think,
depending
you
know,
I
think
we
need
to
look
at
the
master
science
plan
and
see
if
that
is
indeed
the
case,
because
it
was,
you
know,
designed
to
provide
some
flexibility
for
just
for
just
that.
G
The
other
thing
about
the
master
sign
plan
that
this
is
a
question.
In
my
own
mind
I
mean,
if
we're
not,
if
we're
not
doing
a
pud
or
an
spd,
we're
not
going
to
have
the
option
to
look
at
it.
You
know
later
by
a
specific
plan.
I
don't
have
any
problem
with
mark
zitsa's
point
that
you
know
you,
don't
you
don't
always
know
at
the
front
end.
We
know
what
kind
of
sign
package
you
need,
but
you
could
come
in
later
and
we
do
that.
G
We
allow
people
to
show
us
their
sign
sign
configuration
at
specific
plan
station,
but
we
only
have
a
specific
plan
stage
when
we're
talking
about
a
pud
or
spd.
Do
we
even
do
it
on
spds?
So
if,
if
we're
going
to
allow
people
to
make
those
decisions
later,
they'll
have
to
be
some
mechanism
by
which
that
later
occurs.
N
I
would
echo
this
is
mark.
I
would
echo
james's
comment.
I
think
if
the
original
intent
or
one
of
the
original
intents
of
the
overall
code
update,
was
to
reduce
the
number
of
puds
and
spd's,
I
think
by
only
allowing
the
flexibility
to
occur
through
a
pud
and
master
sign
package.
Submittal
you're
just
going
to
continue
with
the
people
requiring
pud
to
get
that
little
bit
of
extra
sign.
I'd
love
to
see
that
taken
care
of
about
a
stack
level.
J
You,
don't
you
don't
need
to
get
a
pud
just
want
to
make
sure
that
that
I'm
mark
that
I'm
clear
on
this
and
then
we're
all
clear.
I
don't
think
you
need
to
get
a
pud
to
do
a
master
science
plan
so.
I
Correct
yeah,
the
third
criteria
or
under
the
applicability
statement
for
master
sign
plans,
is
people
who
elect
to
do
a
master
sign
plan,
so
advocates
can
voluntarily
come
in
and
do
that
I,
I
think
in
the
chat,
there's
a
good
point
about
the
dialogue
between
scott
and
janice
that
you
know
we
could
maybe
allow
for
something
through
that
that
that
could
be
done
both
administratively
and
with
clear
numbers
up
front.
Like
scott
was
saying
so
that
you
know
it
doesn't
become
some
sort
of
discretionary.
I
You
know
uncertain
discretionary
workflow
for
somebody,
it's
something
they
know
they're
entitled
to
just
by
looking
at
the
ordinance,
I
think
that's
perfectly
doable
and
I,
if
I'm
not
wrong,
I
think
janice
and
scott
were
actually
saying
the
same
thing.
So.
M
Yeah
I
figured
that
was
interesting,
yeah.
No,
I
think
I
figured
that
out
too
yeah.
I
think
what
you're
saying
is
right.
I
mean
if,
if
you
could
do,
if
you
could
do
that
objectively,
where
someone
can
see
through
the
code,
you
can
have.
You
know
five
signs
that
are
no
more
than
a
hundred
square
feet,
or
you
can
have
two
signs
that
are
250
square
feet
or
whatever
I
mean
that
that
gives
people
the
certainty
and
it
gives
them
the
flexibility.
N
So
this
is
mark
again.
How
does
this,
I
guess
we'll,
maybe
see
the
full
code,
but
how
is
that
permitted
without
it
being
a
variance
to
the
code?
So
if
the
code
says
here's
how
much
sign
you
have
there's
going
to
be
some
sort
of
footnote
that
says
apply
for
this
and
planning
commission
can
waive
that
requirement
for
x
percent
variation
or.
I
No,
it's
not
a
variance
because
the
criteria
are
baked
into
the
ordinance.
I
mean
the
additional
height
and
additional
area
you
get
are
part
of
the
ordinance
standards.
So
there's
nothing
to
vary
it's
it's
it's
because
one
once
you
submit
the
master
sign
plan
you're
entitled
to
that
extra
area
in
height.
That's
that's
a
standard!
There's!
Nothing
to
vary.
C
Okay,
so
you'll
see
when
you,
when
you
see
that
the
draft
you'll
see
these
types
of
tables
throughout
and
again
I'll,
ask
I
think,
for
those
working
on
current
and
recent
and
future
projects.
C
C
The
approach
was
to
make
sure
that
that
schools
and
churches
that
are
located
in
residential
residentially
zoned
areas
could
be
allowed.
Emd
signage,
so
in
this
table,
you'll
see
information
about
operating
hours
about
the
site.
You
know
how
much
of
the
sign
can
be
an
emd
about
its
distance
from
residential
from
homes.
C
C
G
A
B
C
Two
right
now,
I
believe
somebody
mark
or
jeff
correct
me.
If
I'm
wrong,
I
think
they're
not
they're
not
allowed,
and
applicants
have
had
to
get
variances
and
re-zone
to
get
an
emd
and
now
they
wouldn't
have
to
because
they
would
be
allowed
by
wright
with
certain
operating
hours
and
brightness
and
distance
from
residences.
C
We
actually
couldn't
find
an
end
recent
in
the
last
five
years,
an
emd
application
that
wasn't
part
of
the
pud,
so
we
actually
could
not
test
what
you
know
against
what
was
allowed
and
what.
C
A
I
J
L
This
is
this:
is
clay
farha.
I've
just
got
a
real,
quick
comment
on
that.
I
my
problem
with
emds
is
not
so
much
the
what
they're
showing
is
the
flashing,
and
I
think
we've
got
to
be
careful
there.
I
mean,
like
I
said
before
in
earlier
meeting.
L
Walgreens
won't
even
go
into
edmond
because
they're
so
restrictive
on
the
emd
signs
and
I've
never
understood
the
thing
with
the
neighborhoods
I
mean
as
long
as
they're,
not
flashing
like
las
vegas,
and
they
just
give
basic
information
like
walgreens
I
mean
I
have
no
no
deal
with
walgreens.
Don't
get
me
wrong,
but
it's
my
point
is:
is
that
as
long
as
just
giving
basic
information,
I
don't
see
why
it
even
why
neighborhoods
would
even
have
a
concern
about
it
and
I'll
go
and
I'll
go
on
mute
here.
C
Yeah,
our
definitions
of
so
level,
one
level,
two
and
level
three
emd,
that's
defined
now
in
the
code
and
we're
not
changing
those
definitions
so
level
one.
That's
the
walgreens
sign
the
the
black
with
the
red
text
that
says
whatever
diet,
coke
on
sale.
So
that's
level
one
and
you
can
see
so
level.
One
and
level
two
you
know
are
consistently
allowed
but
level.
Three
have
the
the
more
animated,
graphics
and
flashing
quickly
changing
graphics
and
those
would
not
be
allowed
in
residential
or
in
some
other
commercial.
G
To
clay's
point:
it's
just
fires
again,
you
you
use
the
comment
as
long
as
they
have
basic
information,
we're
not
we're
getting
out
of
the
information
business.
We're
not
gonna,
regulate
what
they
put
on
them.
They
literally
can
sell
the
ad
space
the
the
issue
with
respect
to
the
neighborhoods,
as
you
put
it,
I
think,
has
al
all
to
do
with
how
bright
they
are.
You
know
how
intrusive
they
are.
That's,
that's
all.
C
And
that's
one
reason
we
have
we
put
ours
janice,
you
know
to
help,
you
know,
keep
the
neighborhood.
You
know
quiet.
J
L
Well
then
I
mean-
and
I
I
agree
with
that-
and
I
mean
that
makes
all
the
sense
in
the
world.
I
I
misunderstood,
and
I
I
guess
my
only
comment
is
is
maybe
just
dial
it
back
period.
I
mean
I
mean.
Why
do
you
need
that
flashing?
Obnoxious
sign,
I
mean
again,
it's
not
las
vegas
and
if
you
just
keep
it
simple
like
you
know
what
walgreens
does
and
I
just
use
them
as
an
example.
C
Yeah,
I
was,
I
was
getting
ready
to
address
that
a
second
ago.
So
let
me
see
know
what
your
question
is
and
if
and
if
I
can
answer
it,
it's
not
presented
in
detail
here,
but
it
is
in
the
draft
you'll
see
so
some
of
you
mark
included,
may
remember.
Several
years
ago
there
was
there
were
various
controversial
sign
applications
in
bricktown
and
in
response
to
that,
the
committee
passed
a
ordinance
update
that
made
emds
allowable
only
for
certain
uses.
C
Spectator
sports
was
one
of
them,
so
the
ballpark
could
have
one
and
small
parking
lot
ends
were
allowed
and
there's
one
other
one
I
can't
remember,
but
because
it's
used
because
the
emds
were
allowed
for
certain
uses
that
was
getting
into
content.
C
So
we
have-
and
you
can
see
it
here
on
this
slide.
If
you
look
on
the
right
hand,
side
bc,
that's
bricktown
core,
instead
of
allowing
emds
for
certain
use
types
they're
now
allowed
for
a
certain
site
sizes,
for
example,
sites
with
at
least
10
acres
or
50
parking
spaces.
So
it's
not.
You
know
what
you're
doing
on
that
site
that
allows
you
to
have
the
emds
it's.
It's
the
size
so
an
objective
measure
there
aren't
too
many
10
acre
sites
in
bricktown,
but
that's
how
we've
addressed
that
mark
does.
That.
N
Well
that
I
think
that
was
one
of
the
one
of
the
questions,
because
you're
you're
right
there's
I'd,
be
curious
to
know
how
many
10
acre
sites
there
are
in
breakdown.
So
I
I
guess
I
was
surprised
to
see
how
much
more
signage
for
emd.
C
N
Yeah
well
so
it
kind
of
sounds
like
really.
The
emd
is
just
going
to
be
permitted
on
parking
lots
or
parking
structures,
because,
like
thinking
through
the
development
sites
that
are
left
in
bricktown,
I'm
not
sure
there's
a
10
acre
site.
But
my
question
is
about
the
setback
from
residential
from
residential
use.
N
Just
to
be,
I
guess
it
says,
adjacent
to
residential
property,
which
I
think
is
different
than
residential
use,
because
if
it's,
if
it's
bricktown
core
you
know
technically
that's
the
mixed-use
zone,
there's
not
a
an
r4
zoning
to
be
adjacent
to
so,
I
think,
is
the
intent
there
back
from
an
actual
residential
use.
C
I
will
double
check
that
there's
a
lot
yeah
mark
that
mark.
Why.
N
A
I'm
curious
this
is
aj
kirkpatrick,
again
related
to
bricktown.
You
know
this
is
reminding
me
of
the
oklahoman
sign
across
from
the
cold
corps
and
the
impact
on
hotel
visitors.
You
know,
I
don't
know
if
that's
been
considered
at
all,
but
just
been
a
week
in
a
hotel
in
bricktown.
So
it's
top
of
mind.
N
And
lisa:
do
I
understand
the
footnote?
Does
it
mark?
Do
I
understand
the
footnote
correctly
that
residentially
zoned
does
not
include
live,
work,
units
or
dwelling
in
mixed
use?
So
if
there's
an
apartment
building
with
retail
on
the
bottom
and
you're
doing
a
level
three,
that's
that's
not
considered
a
residential
zoned
building,
so
you
could
put
up
level
3
emd
across
the
street.
G
G
But
you
know
because
when
it's
annexed,
that's
what
it
is
zoned
r1,
some
of
it
very
well-
may
develop
r1,
some
of
it
may
not,
and
so
the
distinction
between
a
residential
use,
which
you
know,
would
exclude
lots
and
lots
of
r1
property,
because
it's
not
developed
yet
and
and
limiting
it
to
res
or
granting
it
sort
of
blanket
granting
it
to
every
r1
zone
property,
a
lot
of
which
pretty
clearly
will
not
be
developed.
R1.
G
That's
that's
going
to
require
a
little
bit
of
finesse
and
thinking
through
and,
on
the
other
hand,
yeah.
Why
is
a
live
work
unit
or
a
you
know,
a
multi-use
that
permits
residentials
entitled
to
sort
of
less
protection,
these
the
the
big
signs,
the
full-on
signs
they
are
really
intrusive
and
so
any
a
hotel.
I
wouldn't
have
even
thought
about
that.
Of
course,
we
think
about
these
kind
of
signs
in
bricktown
and
and
the
core
downtown,
like
the
oklahoman
sign
you
know,
and
their
proximity
to
resident
to
hotels
would
be
really
problematic.
C
Okay,
I'm
going
to
move
on
because
I
want
to
make
sure
and
get
to
this.
I
know
people
have
to
leave
and
let
me
see.
C
C
Okay,
can
everyone
see
the
the
code
web
page?
It's
got
a
picture
of
the
overhaul
suit,
damn
on
it.
B
C
So
I
will
send
you
a
link
and
when
you
go
to
that
link,
you
will
see
this
page
and
you
are
so
this
is.
This:
is
the
the
working
public
site?
C
But
so
when
I
click
it,
actually
other
people
can
see
it
without
the
password,
but
you'll
see
here's
that
table
of
contents
on
the
left,
and
that
was
part
of
my
slide
presentation,
so
I've
just
landed
on
attach
signs
and
if
I
want
to
comment,
I
will
share
with
you
the
password
if
this
works.
Okay,
so
the
password
and
again
I'll
share
it.
It's
myriad
gardens.
C
I
Subdivision
science
is
under
freestanding
signs,
it's
59-16107
and
that
it's
the
last
subsection
of
that
so
subsection
c
yeah.
C
So
here,
division,
entry
sign
16107.3
and
here's
mark
livingston,
here's
the
here's
the
chart.
C
I
can't
immediately
tell
you
how
this
compares
to
what's
allowed
now,
but
if
I
wanted
to
comment
on
it
like
if
I
thought
sign
area,
if
I
thought
this
40
square
feet,
if
I
thought
that
was
too
small
or
too
large
or
not
flexible
enough,
I
could
come
over
here
to
comments
and
you
know
put
in
my
name.
Your
computer
should
auto
recognize
and
autofill
your
name
and
email
if
it
doesn't
the
first
time
it
will
after
you
enter
it
the
next
time-
and
I
can
just
put
please
check
this
and
submit
it.
C
So
it's
pretty.
Oh
I'm
not
allowed
to
comments
because
I'm
stabbed.
B
N
N
C
Sure,
to
be
honest,
I'm
not
I'm
not
sure
I
need
to
talk
through
with
eighth
floor
about
their
interpretation.
I
don't
think
we
define
it
define
how
it's
measured,
otherwise,.
H
That
that's
one
of
the
issues,
this
mark
livingston,
that's
one
of
the
issues
I
do
have,
because
it's
so
restrictive,
if
you
don't
have
it
on
a
wall
for
design
purposes,
and
that
will
be
one
of
my
comments,
along
with
some
photos
from
other
cities
and
what
they
allow
at
subdivision
entrances
to
make
them
really
attractive
and
nice.
So
you
said
that
the
passcode
is
myriad
gardens.
Is
that
with
a
capital
m
and
a
capital
g.
C
Yes
and
I
I
will
send
it
to
everybody,
I'm
gonna
see
if
I
can
I'm
gonna
marx
it
so
I'm
gonna
see
if
it'll.
Let
me
be
you
for
a
second.
J
Yeah,
mark
and
mark
those
are
those
are
great
comments
and
we
we
had
heard
those
before
that
there
are
interpretation
issues,
and
so
we
we
want
to
make
sure
that
it's
clear
in
the
code
so
that
things
like
that
aren't
left
up
to.
You
know
staff
interpretations,
because
I
know
that
those
have
been
problems
in
the
past.
So
if
it's
unclear,
please
let
us
know,
because
we
would
really
like
to
fix
those
in
the
code
rather
than
have
to
rely
on
interpretations
that
are
not
ideal.
N
N
H
G
B
G
G
We
had
the
whole
big
discussion
about
whether
well,
the
company's
logo
is
artwork
and
it's
like
well,
I
think
most
people
would
say
no
the
company's
logo
is
signage,
but
but
the
the
definition
of
artwork.
You
know
a
statue
of
a
bear.
Most
people
would
look
at
that
and
say
well,
yeah,
that's
artwork,
but
that
that
that
particular
point,
I
think,
also
is
something.
Maybe
maybe
we
could
get
a
give
a
little
bit
more
thought
very
hard.
I
think
to
make
kind
of
a
distinction.
C
Yeah
we've
addressed
some
of
what
you're
talking
about
janice
in
the
mural
section,
which
is
16
108.8
right
now,
murals
are
currently
in
the
existing
code.
Murals
are
a
conditional
use,
but
they
would
be
changed
to
a
permitted
use
and
the
criteria
for
approval
will
be
listed
in
this
section.
Instead
of
the
conditional
use
section,
all
murals
will
require
a
signed
permit,
but
no
murals
will
go
to
arts,
commission
and
murals
that
are
in
design.
Districts
will
go
to
their
respective
design
district.
C
So
it's
it's
removing
the
arts
commission,
which
may
sound
counterintuitive
to
some
of
you,
but
we
got
a
lot
of
feedback
about
all
of
the
steps
that
were
required
and
since
the
arts
commission
cannot
comment
on
the
content,
the
the
reasons
for
murals
to
go
to
arts
commission
were
fewer
and
fewer,
because
we've
included
we've
transferred
over
a
lot
of
the
existing
murals
criteria
over
to
this
section
and
made
them
more
objective
so
that
the
signed
permit
reviewer
can
confirm
them.
We
do
you
will
notice.
C
J
So
that's
a
good
example
of
something
that
was
that
we
still
are
working
with
legal
on.
So
you
know,
as
we
said
before,
not
not
everything
in
here
is
final.
You
know
we
had
the
other
issue
that
susan
common
susan
randall
commented
about
earlier.
This
is
another
one
that
we've
been
working
and
will
be
working
with
them
on
to
make
sure
that
it
is,
is
all
perfectly
legal.
N
J
And
so,
if
somebody,
it's
really
just
kind
of
a
you
know,
if,
if
staff
feels
like
oh,
this
might
violate
community
standards,
they
can
send
it
to
the
director
and
it
can
be,
it
can
be
appealed.
So
you
know,
I
think
we
have
the
board
of
adjustment
in
there
as
the
as
the
actual
deciding
body.
So
if
it
gets
flagged
by
staff
as
hey,
this
could
potentially
be.
You
know
harmful
to
minors,
because
it
has
cartoon
characters,
shooting
up
heroin
or
something.
F
Jeff
this
is
susan
randall,
and
that
is
one
of
the
those
two
provisions
we're
working
at.
So
we
have
actually
changed
some
of
that
language
in
there,
but
it's
defined
by
state
statute
on
what
is
obscene.
D
B
C
J
Yeah
we've
been
working
with
rita
on
that,
so
if
she,
if
she
hasn't
been
with
connecting
with
you
on
that,
yet
we
will
get
together
with
you.
A
This
is
aj
kirkpatrick,
again
specific
to
murals.
I
probably
want
to
think
about
this
some
more,
but
while
I
was
at
dokc
or
downtown
okc,
you
know
we
we
tried
to
do
some
thunder
based
art.
That
was,
we
met
some
resistance
on
because
it
was
ultimately
viewed
by
staff
as
being
advertisement
for
the
thunder.
A
I'm
curious,
if,
if
that
has
been
brought
back
onto
the
table,
is
anything
to
re-examine
as
part
of
this,
you
know.
If
you
go
down
that
path,
if
someone
were
to
go
to
plaza
walls
and
repaint,
the
campbell
suit
can
of
andy
warhol,
then
that
that
would
also
be,
I
guess,
an
advertisement.
C
C
I
hope
so
we
we
have
scrutinized
this
section
a
lot
internally,
but
I
welcome
everybody
to
do
similar
because
the
intent
was
to
make
mural.
Everybody
loves
murals.
The
intent
was
to
make
it
easier,
but
also
have
something
to
that
identifies
them
as
legally
established.
You
know
like
a
permit
with
the
owner's
signature,
something
to
distinguish
them
from
graffiti,
so
we
had
to
get.
You
know
a
little
bureaucratic
specific
on
the
language,
but
the
intent
was.
C
You
know
to
make
interesting,
murals
easy
to
put
up,
and
this
would
be
so
this
section
would
apply
to
all
design
districts
there
are
murals
and
design
districts
would
still
need
a
ca
because
it
would
need
to
be
evaluated
if
they're
being
painted
over
painted
on
non-painted
surfaces
or
if
they're,
obscuring
architectural
or
historic
features,
but
one
last
thing
before
people
leave
mark.
Why
do
you
know
we've
we're
trying
to
set
this
up
where
everybody
will
be
able
to
see
everybody
else's
comments?
Mark?
I
I
think
it
shows
up
in
the
edits
of
the
maintenance
module,
but.
I
I
think
they
may
be
able
to,
but
again
I'll
have
to
check
with
encode.
On
that
specific
question,
I
did
confirm,
though,
by
email.
While
we
were
talking
that
you
cannot,
they
don't
have
a
way
for
you
to
upload
pictures
right
now,
so
committee
members
could
post
that
to
teams
or
get
it
to
us
some
other
way
if
they
have
something.
That's
like
a
photo
image
off
off
topic
from
what
you
just
asked,
but
no
I
I
would
have
to
ask
them
specifically.
C
And
we
are
asking
for
a
pretty
quick
turnaround
of
next
week
as
I'm
flipping
through
here.
I'm
trying
to
just
illustrate
just
how
much
more
graphic
this
code
is
and
how
you
know
the
you
know
the
the
tables
are
visually
organized.
C
J
Yeah
yeah
and
again
apologies
for
the
tight
timeline.
You
know
we
we
we
have
a
moratorium
in
place
and
we're
trying
to
to
meet
that,
and
I
think
we
all
on
this
meeting
know
how
long
the
adoption
process
takes.
So
we're
we're
trying
to
to
accommodate
that
schedule
and
we
lost
a
week
due
to
the
the
ice
storm
so
yeah.
If
you
can
get
us
your
comments
in
a
week
which
you're
appreciated
you
know,
if
you,
if
you
can't
you
know,
we
understand
we'll
still,
of
course,
take
the
comments.
J
So
yeah
much
appreciate
your
understanding
and
your
your
efforts
getting
us
comments
as
quick
as
you
can
and
we'll
we'll
be
responding.
You
know
we'll
be
tracking,
and
so,
as
you
make
comments,
if
you
ask
questions
we'll
answer
them,
you
know
in
in
the
in
the
app
itself.
C
Yeah-
and
I
would
suggest,
because
everybody's
time
is
limited,
that
some
of
you
may
want
to
just
go
through
the
code
and
look
for
a
specific
topic
that
you
want
to
weigh
in
on.
Like
some,
some
people
have
a
voice
that
they're
particularly
concerned
about
emds
or
subdivision
signs.
You
know
that
would
be
time
well
spent
just
to
focus
on
a
few
specific
items.
C
Some
people
may
want
to
take
a
bigger
picture.
Look
at
all
the
graphics
to
see
if
they
are
communicating
effectively.
C
It
would
be
helpful,
you
know
if,
if
anybody
did
just
a
flip
through
to
check
the
user
friendliness-
and
you
know
I
mentioned
earlier-
if
you
have
a
pending
application
or
a
recent
application
or
an
upcoming
application,
take
that
application
and
see
if
you
can
quickly
and
easily
find
you
know
what
you
would
be
allowed
to
do
under
the
new
code.
I
think
that's
one
of
the
best
ways
that
this
code
can
be
tested.
N
J
J
We're
we're
in
that
awkward
phase.
Where
you
know,
we've
adopted
the
amendments
and
and
we're
in
the
process
of
updating
our
websites.
N
So
the
if
you
use
that,
as
does
plan
okc
and
I'm
looking
at
it
right
now
and
it's
kind
of
hard
to
tell
for
may
avenue,
for
example-
is
plano
kc
changing
the
street
typology
based
on
what's
adjacent
to
it.
So
if
three
quarters
of
a
mile
have
residential,
is
it
still
considered
a
major
arterial
or
is
it?
Is
it
being
bumped
down
to
a
neighborhood
street
because
of
what's
you
know,
what
uses
are
adjacent.
J
N
C
Okay,
thank
you
again.
Everybody
for
attending
and
participating
again
ask
ask
me
any
questions
at
any
time
and
if
you,
you
know,
need
any
more
information
and
I
can
provide
it
to
you
in
the
next
week.
Jeff
do
you
have
any
other
final
final
parting
words.
J
Just
thank
you
everybody.
This
has
been
a
great
discussion,
appreciate
the
questions
and
and
the
insights.
We
look
forward
to
hearing
more
of
that,
or
seeing
more
of
it
in
your
in
your
comments,
optimistic
that
we'll
get
a
really
really
good
code
that
are,
that
will
be
good
for
our
community.