 Oh God. Here we go. All right. All right. I'm going to call the meeting to order. Welcome to DDRC commissioners staff and guests. Multiple staff members are present to make sure that the meeting runs smoothly and all applicants and citizens are able to communicate with the Commission at the appropriate times. Will staff please call the roll? Ms. Branham. Here. Mr. Brim. Here. Mr. Greenberg. Mr. McGuire. Mr. Salibi. Here. And Mr. Wolf. Here. We have quorum. Thank you. In order to avoid ex parte communications, DDRC members are under strict instructions not to discuss cases under consideration with the public or with each other outside of the public forum. The meeting typically starts with staff calling the case, giving a summary of the project and then calling on the applicant to present if they wish. Decisions are typically made in one evening. Decisions may be appealed within 30 days to a court of competent jurisdiction. Oaths will be administered individually as we hear either from applicants or from live speakers. Applicants with requests before the DDRC are allotted a presentation time of 10 minutes. This time should include but is not limited to an overview of the project, case history, and any pertinent meetings held regarding the request. This time also includes all persons presenting information on behalf of the applicant such as attorneys, engineers, and architects. This time limit does not include any questions asked by a DDRC or staff regarding requests. Members of the general public are given the opportunity to address their concerns in intervals of two minutes. Applicants may have five minutes to respond. Staff has a timer and will make presenters aware of when their time has expired. Staff, are there any changes to the agenda? We've had one change under the regular agenda. 1315 Woodrow Street requests for design approval for exterior changes in the Melrose Heights, Oakland architectural conservation district has been deferred. Otherwise, the agenda stands. Thank you. The DDRC uses consent agenda to approve non-controversial or routine matters by a single motion and vote. If a member of the DDRC or the general public wants to discuss an item on the consent agenda, that item is removed from the consent agenda and considered during the meeting. The DDRC then approves the remaining consent agenda items. Will staff please read the consent agenda? The first item is 1305 Hagot Avenue. It's a request for design approval for an addition in the Melrose Heights, Oakland architectural conservation district. The next item is 2401 through 2403 Sumter Street, a request for preliminary certification for the Bailey Bill in the Cotton Town Bellevue architectural conservation district. And the third is 2201 Lincoln Street, a request for design approval for an addition and preliminary certification of the Bailey Bill in the Elmwood Park architectural conservation district. Is there anyone from the DDRC that would like any item removed from the consent agenda? Is there anyone from the public that would like to have an item removed from the consent agenda? Do I have a motion and second to remove an item from the consent agenda? If hearing none, do I have a motion and second to accept the consent agenda subject to all conditions contained in the case summaries as well as to approve the July minutes? I move to accept the consent agenda subject to all the conditions contained in the case summaries as well as July minutes. Mr. Broom? Yes. Ms. Branham? Yes. Mr. Greenberg? Mr. McGuire? Yes. Mr. Salibi? Yes. And Mr. Wolfe? Yes. The motion passes. All right, moving along to the regular agenda, will staff please read the regular agenda? That works. The first and only item on the regular agenda this evening is at 705 Elmwood Avenue. This is an appeal to a staff decision for a pylon sign in the city center design district. The applicant submitted a request for four new signs in an existing sign fabrication business on Elmwood Avenue at Wayne Street adjacent to the Elmwood Viaduct in a Vista Greenway. Sign one is a freestanding 15 foot tall pylon sign. The following guidelines provide guidance within the city center design district for signs that must receive a certificate of design approval prior to permitting. While the base zoning district of MU2 allows for freestanding signs up to 15 feet tall, the city center design guidelines suggest that signage should be pedestrian oriented, which has consistently been interpreted as a maximum height of six feet when adjacent to the public sidewalk. And for information, signs two, three, and four meet the city center design guidelines and the zoning aren't included in your packet for reference only. And I won't read all the guidelines, but to be consistent in making decisions, staff generally recommends freestanding signs not exceed six feet in height to maintain the top of the sign, not be taller than the average pedestrian. Since this is not an ordinance, there is some flexibility in this number. Exceptions have been made by the DDRC in the past, typically renovations of existing non-conforming signs and or locations which are adjacent to higher volume high speed traffic corridors. Generally, the exceptions have allowed for seven to eight foot tall signs. This specific area of Elmwood Avenue, pardon me, adjacent to the overpass, is unique in that the majority of roadway traffic is above the street level of the business. While standard pedestrian-scaled monument signs are typically also visible from cars along the roadway at the same elevation, this location does not provide that same visibility to motorists. Staff denied the request for sign one due to the need to be consistent with past staff decisions. A departure from the standard interpretation has always come to the DDRC for a decision. If the commission feels compelled to allow for an exception based on the unique location of this request, it is recommended that the specific site conditions be referenced in the motion to ensure that a new precedent is not set for all freestanding signs in the City Center Design District. Staff finds that the proposal for sign one is in a unique location next to an elevated roadway where additional height could be acceptable without setting a precedent for future signs in the City Center Design District. So I don't think the applicant is here, but... Would any members of the public like to speak? Does DDRC have any questions for staff regarding the project? I have a question. There's an existing sign right across the street, the bike, and it's almost the same design as the post. I guess I was put in a good while back. Correct. Because of the guideline, that sign that they're proposing is too high? Well, you mean the Kulletown Bike Collective or this sign? Is that the question? Are you talking about the existing sign that's across the street or this sign? The new sign. Yeah, I mean, it's like I said, it meets the zoning. It allows for that height, but our City Center Design Guidelines, we've always required that signs be six feet when we approve them at staff level because of the guidelines that ask for pedestrian orientation. So that's why this is kind of an exception to what we generally approve at the staff level. Yeah, and why it's important that it come to the Commission for a decision because it's kind of an exception. Well, the way I see it, when you're on Elmwood and you see the sign, you're already out in the country and you come up with a sign to meet the guidelines, those are the people that have a lower level, not on Elmwood and whatever the front is right. That's what it should be. Just to be clear, the guidelines don't expressly reference six feet as a limitation. That's correct. Okay. Any other questions from commissioners? All right. Do we have a motion? I move to give approval for the request for the design approval at 705 Elmwood Avenue for the new sign, given its unique location next to an elevated roadway where additional height could be acceptable without setting a precedent for future signs in the City Center Design District. Second. Mr. Brunham. Yes. Ms. Brannum. Yes. Mr. Greenberg. Yes. Mr. McGuire. Yes. Mr. Salibi. Yes. And Mr. Wolf. Yes. The motion passes. Thank you very much. All right. Do we have any other business from staff? We do not. All right. Hearing none, I will adjourn the meeting. Thanks, everybody. I think we usually have a motion to adjourn. Fair enough. Do we have a motion to adjourn? Second. Oh, I'm sorry. Yes, I'm sorry. I need to introduce a new staff member. Oh, yeah, we do. Why don't we finish the motion and then I'll do that. So you had a second to adjourn? We didn't. Okay. So. All in favor? Aye. All right. So this is Betsy Kleinfelder. She's coming to us. She's stepping into Megan McNiches' position. She's been with us two weeks and we're very, very happy to have her with us. So. Oh, wonderful. Welcome. There, now we're done. Thank you. Thank you, everybody.