[00:00:01] SECOND, A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL. [Zoning Board of Adjustments on September 06, 2023.] ALL IN FAVOR? IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? I'M SORRY. NO. [INAUDIBLE] IS THERE. ALL IN FAVOR? AND IT IS APPROVED. ALL RIGHT. PUBLIC COMMENT. THIS IS ANYONE'S OPPORTUNITY TO REQUEST TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON AGENDA ITEMS WITHOUT PUBLIC HEARINGS OR NON AGENDA ITEMS AND NON AGENDA ITEMS. DOES ANYONE. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL MOVE ON. GOOD DEAL. ALL RIGHT, CATHERINE, YOU WANT TO CALL THE CASE, PLEASE? THIS IS 23Z-006. IT'S 3321 AVENUE O. THE REQUEST IS AN APPEAL OF STAFF'S DETERMINATION. 25 NOTICES WERE SENT, 6 RETURNED, 2 IN FAVOR, 3 IN OPPOSITION AND 1 ONE COMMENT. THE PUBLIC COMMENT WAS PROVIDED TO YOU IN PUBLIC COMMENT REPORT THAT WAS EMAILED AROUND 11:00 THIS MORNING FOR YOUR REVIEW AND YOU HAVE HARD COPIES AT YOUR DESK. BACKGROUND IN EARLY 2003 THE SUBJECT SITE AND I DO HAVE A CORRECTION ON THE SITE, ON THE STAFF REPORT. THE STAFF REPORT SAYS THAT THE THE THE LOCATION WAS CITED FOR A SIGN ON BUILDING, BUT THEY WERE NOT OFFICIALLY CITED. THE THE CITY MARSHAL VISITED THE PROPERTY, SO THE CITY MARSHAL VISITED THE PROPERTY FOR A SIGN ON BUILDING. THE OWNER REACHED OUT TO THE PLANNING DIVISION FOR A DETERMINATION IF THE ITEM PLACED ON THE BUILDING MET THE DEFINITION OF A SIGN. STAFF REVIEWED AND DETERMINED THAT THE ITEM DOES NOT MEET THE DEFINITION OF A SIGN. A MAYOR, A NEIGHBOR. MR. DANNENMAIER, FILED AN APPEAL OF STAFF'S DETERMINATION ON THIS DECISION. ALLOWABLE SIGNAGE IS REGULATED BY ZONING DISTRICT. THE PROPERTY IS ZONED RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY R-1. THE R-1 ZONING DISTRICT ONLY ALLOWS FOR ONE NAMEPLATE SIGN WITH THE SIZE NOT TO EXCEED TWO SQUARE FEET. A NAMEPLATE SIGN IS A SMALL SIGN THAT IDENTIFIES THE OWNER OR OCCUPANT OF A BUILDING. THE SUMMARY. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING AN APPEAL OF STAFF'S DETERMINATION REGARDING THE DEFINITION OF A SIGN. ACCORDING TO SECTION 5.201 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS SIGN HAS THE FOLLOWING DEFINITION. SIGN ANY DEVICE OR STRUCTURE THAT IS INTENDED TO ATTRACT THE ATTENTION OF THE PUBLIC IN ORDER TO PROMOTE THE SALE OF A PRODUCT, COMMODITY SERVICE AND OR FOR IDENTIFICATION. A PICTURE OF THE DISPLAY ITEM WAS INCLUDED IN YOUR STAFF REPORT. IT IS A VINTAGE DISPLAY WITH THE WORD MOTEL OUTLINED IN PAINT AND NEON TUBING. WHEN THE PROPERTY WAS VISITED BY THE CITY MARSHAL'S OFFICE, THE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REVIEWED THE ITEM AND THE DEFINITION OF A SIGN LOCATED IN THE LDR. THE DETERMINATION WAS THAT THE ITEM DOES NOT MEET THE DEFINITION OF A SIGN. THE LOCATION A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH A GARAGE APARTMENT DOES NOT OPERATE AS A MOTEL. THEREFORE, THE ITEM IS INTENDED TO TRACK IS NOT INTENDED TO ATTRACT THE ATTENTION OF THE PUBLIC, DOES NOT PROMOTE THE SALE OF A PRODUCT OR COMMODITY OR SERVICE, NOR IS IT INTENDED FOR IDENTIFICATION. WHILE THE ITEM MAY HAVE PREVIOUSLY BEEN ASSIGNED IN ITS CURRENT LOCATION, IT DOES NOT MEET THE TECHNICAL DEFINITION OF THE SIGN. THE APPLICANT SUBMITTAL WAS INCLUDED IN YOUR STAFF REPORT AS ATTACHMENT A. PROCEDURE. THE APPEAL IS FILED PURSUANT TO LDR SECTION 13.901 ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS. SUCH APPEALS ARE STAFF'S DETERMINATION ARE HEARD BY THE ZBA. AGGRIEVED PARTIES MAY FILE SUCH AN APPEAL IF THEY WERE WITHIN 200FT OF THE PROPERTY THAT IS SUBJECT TO THE DECISION. THE NOTICE OF [INAUDIBLE]. THE REST OF THAT IS IN YOUR STAFF REPORT AND EXERCISING THE POWER TO DECIDE AN APPEAL, THE DECISION MAKER MAY REVERSE OR AFFIRM WHOLLY OR PARTLY, OR MAY MODIFY THE ORDER REQUIREMENT, DECISION OR DETERMINATION APPEALED FROM AND MAKE SUCH ORDER, REQUIREMENT, DECISION OR DETERMINATION AS OUGHT TO BE MADE. AND TO THAT END SHALL HAVE ALL POWERS OF THE OFFICER OR BODY FROM WHO THE APPEAL IS TAKEN. WITH RESPECT TO DECISION OF THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, THE CONCURRING VOTE OF 73% OF THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD IS NECESSARY TO REVERSE AN ORDER REQUIREMENT DECISION OR DETERMINATION OF A STAFF MEMBER. AND THERE'S INFORMATION ABOUT APPEALS IN THE STAFF REPORT. AND WE HAVE SOME PICTURES. JUST A MINUTE TO GET THOSE UP. OKAY. THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THE SUBJECT OF THE APPEAL. THIS IS A PICTURE LOOKING TOWARDS THE GARAGE APARTMENT WHERE THE DISPLAY ITEM IS LOCATED. AND WE HAVE THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? YES. MY QUESTION IS, WHAT IS THE QUESTION? WHAT ARE WE WHAT IS THE THE BOARD DETERMINING TODAY? [00:05:04] THE BOARD IS DETERMINING IF THEY ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH STAFF'S INTERPRETATION THAT THIS ITEM IS NOT A SIGN. SO YOU'RE BEING ASKED TO EITHER UPHOLD STAFF'S DECISION THAT IT'S NOT A SIGN OR YOU CAN OVERTURN IT AND DETERMINE THAT IT IS A SIGN, IN WHICH CASE IT WOULD HAVE TO BE REMOVED. OR YOU CAN MODIFY THE DECISION IN SOME WAY. THANK YOU. THIS IS THE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF? THAT'S CORRECT, YES. THE PLANNING DIVISION IS OVERSIZED? CORRECT. THE PLANNING DIVISION. I'M A MEMBER OF THE PLANNING DIVISION. AND WE ADMINISTER THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, WHICH IS THE CITY'S ZONING REGULATIONS AND THAT INCLUDES SIGNS. OKAY, SO. SO HOW DOES THAT RELATE TO THIS BEING A RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY OR ONE CODE THAT SAYS THE SIGN HAS TO BE TWO BY TWO? SO OUR DETERMINATION IS PLANNING STAFF DETERMINED IT WAS NOT A SIGN? CORRECT. WHAT DID THEY DETERMINE IT WAS? IT'S JUST CALLING IT A DISPLAY ITEM. YEAH. SO OUR DETERMINATION IS NOT TECHNICALLY A SIGN. IS THAT RIGHT? COMPARATIVELY. COMPARATIVELY SURE. THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING SIMILAR TO IT. OKAY. I'M JUST ASKING. OKAY, SO BASICALLY, HOW AM I UNDERSTANDING THIS IS THAT IT WOULD BE A SIGN IF THE INTENTION WAS TO BE A SIGN. BUT IN THIS CASE, THE INTENT IS NOT FOR IT TO BE A SIGN, BUT A DECLARATION, BASICALLY. RIGHT. THAT WAS STAFF'S DETERMINATION. CAROL, THANK YOU, SO I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION ABOUT SIGNS, AND IT'S THEIR ILLUMINATION, HOW BRIGHT THEY ARE. WAS THERE A DETERMINATION ABOUT THE LUMENS THAT EMITTED FROM THIS DECORATIVE WALL OBJECT? NO, BECAUSE IT'S NOT A STAFF'S DETERMINATION WAS THAT IT WAS NOT A SIGN, SO THERE WOULD BE NO REGULATIONS TO APPLY. BUT THERE'S OTHER ISSUES ABOUT ILLUMINATION THAT WE. IF IT WERE A SIGN. NO, NOT JUST IF IT WERE A SIGN, IF IT WERE A BACK YARD LIGHT. I MEAN, YOU KNOW, IF I HAVE A SECURITY LIGHT, I'M RESTRICTED BY HOW BRIGHT MY SECURITY LIGHT CAN BE. THE QUESTION WE WERE ASKED TO DETERMINE WAS IF IT WAS A SIGN AND OUR DETERMINATION WAS THAT IT WASN'T. SO WE DIDN'T DO ANY FURTHER INVESTIGATION INTO THE ITEM YOU DECIDED IT WASN'T A SIGN, DIDN'T DECIDE IF IT WAS SOMETHING ELSE. RIGHT. OKAY. IT'S JUST NOT AN ITEM THAT WE REGULATE. WE HAVE NO REGULATIONS TO APPLY TO IT. OH, OKAY. I THOUGHT MAYBE IT'S BRIGHTNESS MIGHT HAVE SOME IMPACT ON THE COMMUNITY. WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED A COMPLAINT SPECIFICALLY ABOUT ITS IMPACT TO LIGHTING. IF WE DID, WE WOULD LOOK INTO THAT. THAT'S NOT THE QUESTION. THAT'S NOT THE QUESTION. THAT'S NOT THE QUESTION. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. I GUESS I'LL GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS POINT. IS THE APPLICANT IN THE ROOM? YES, SIR. PLEASE COME FORWARD. STATE YOUR NAME. SIGN IN ON THE PAPER. MY NAME IS WILLIAM DANNENMAIER. GO AHEAD, SIR. THANK YOU, SIR. I HAVE LIVED WITHIN THE REGULATIONS OF THE R-1 RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD OF AVENUE O FOR ALMOST 20 YEARS. THE CODE EXISTED BEFORE WE BOUGHT OUR HOUSES. THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS IMPROVED. THE R-1 CODE HAS LED TO INCREASES IN THE VALUE OF OUR PROPERTIES AND A PROFOUND INCREASE IN THE TAXES WE PAY. [00:10:03] OUR TAXES DOUBLE AS HOMESTEAD PEOPLE EVERY 7.2 YEARS, ACCORDING TO THE RULE OF 72. I PAY TAXES. YOU ENFORCE RULES. IT WORKS. THE REDEFINITION OF THE WORD SIGN WAS DONE SECRETLY AND COUNTER TO THE PUBLIC PERMITTING PROCESS DEFINED IN THE CODE. I SENT AN EMAIL TO STAFF PRIOR TO THE CHANGE OF THE INVENTION OF SIGN TO OBJECT, ASKING THAT WHEN THIS WAS CONSIDERED THAT I BE NOTIFIED AS PART OF THE PUBLIC HEARING. THAT IS BECAUSE MY EXPERIENCE WITH THE PLANNING BOARD HAS BEEN POSITIVE. PREVIOUSLY, A NEIGHBOR WANTED TO BUILD A STAIRCASE IN FRONT OF MY GARAGE OR MY GATE INTO THE ALLEY. STAFF APPROVED THAT, BUT THE PLANNING BOARD LOOKED AT THE PICTURES I GAVE AND SAW, NO, THAT WOULD BLOCK YOUR EXIT. SO I TRUSTED THE PLANNING BOARD. BUT THE PLANNING BOARD WAS CIRCUMVENTED. THE ABSURD REDEFINITION HARMS PROPERTY VALUES AND SKIRTS THE LAW. I'M NOT SAYING IT BREAKS THE LAW. I'M SAYING IT CLEVERLY BY HALF SKIRTS THE LAW APPLIED EQUALLY. THE DEFINITION WOULD LEAD TO R-1 NEIGHBORHOODS CLUTTERED. I BELIEVE THAT'S THE TERM USED IN THE CODE WITH BRIGHT NEON SIGNS, SOMETHING THE CODE SPECIFICALLY PRECLUDES. THE OWNER OF 3321, A SELF DESCRIBED MINI HOTEL BUILDER. AND YOU WILL SEE IN MY SUBMISSION A CUT AND PASTE FROM THE WEBSITE OF THE OWNER OF 3321 WHERE THEY DECLARE THEMSELVES TO BE A MINI HOTEL BUILDER. IS ADVERTISING THIS HOTEL BUILDER IS ADVERTISING ITS BUSINESS WITH A SIGN. I'M SHOWING YOU THIS BECAUSE THE STAFF REPORT THE PHOTOGRAPH ON THE COVER IS TAKEN WITH A FISH EYE LENS THAT MINIMIZES THE SIZE OF THE SIGN. YOU CAN TELL THAT IT'S BEEN A FISHEYE LENS BECAUSE THE FENCE IS TALLER THAN THE CAR. NOTE THIS IS THE TRUE SIZE. I'VE NOT ALTERED THIS AS A NAVAL VETERAN WHO SWORE TO UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES. I AM NOT LYING TO YOU ABOUT THIS. WE DO NOT SEEK TO DENY 3321 THE PROFIT OF ITS BUSINESS. I HAVE A BUSINESS MYSELF OR THE JOY OF NEON. WE WANT TO PRESERVE THE VALUE OF OUR PROPERTIES AND THE CHARACTER OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. IF YOU READ THE CODE, IT SAYS A SIGN SHOULD FIT THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND IT SHOULD FIT THE HISTORICAL QUALITY OF THE BUILDING. THE RATIONAL PERCEPTION OF ANY LITERATE PERSON IS THAT THERE IS A MOTEL IN THE MIDDLE OF A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT THE SIGN SAYS. IT'S NOT AN OBJECT. IT'S A SIGN. I KNOW THAT BECAUSE I CAN READ IT. IF THE SIGN IS ART, WHICH HAS BEEN FLOATED, IF THE SIGN IS ART, IT SHOULD BE DISPLAYED FACING INWARD AND NOT OUTWARD TO THE PUBLIC ON THE STREET. SEE THE STREET IN THIS PICTURE. I'M ACROSS THE STREET WHEN I'M TAKING THIS PICTURE. AND ACROSS THE STREET YOU CAN SEE THE SIGN CLEARLY ADVERTISING THE MINI HOTEL BUILDERS BUSINESS. BUT IF IT IS ART, IT SHOULD BE DISPLAYED INWARD AND NOT OUTWARD TO THE PUBLIC ON THE STREET. AND I SAID IN ONE OF MY SUBMISSIONS I SHOWED YOU FOUR OTHER LOCATIONS THE SIGN COULD HAVE BEEN PUT IN THE COURTYARD BEHIND THE RED BRICK HOUSE. THAT WOULD NOT BE ILLUMINATING TO THE STREET. [00:15:03] FACING THE STREET MAKES IT EITHER ADVERTISING OR FALSE ADVERTISING AND REDUCES THE VALUE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WHEN MY WIFE AND I LOOK AT PROPERTIES, WE LOOK AT STREET VIEW AND LOOK AT WHAT'S ACROSS THE STREET AND ANYONE LOOKING AT STREET VIEW, FORTUNATELY IT'S FOUR YEARS OUT OF DATE, BUT ANYONE LOOKING AT STREET VIEW WOULD SEE A MOTEL ACROSS THE STREET. THEY DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S AN AVANT GARDE SIGN OR I'M SORRY, AVANT GARDE OBJECT. IT REDUCES THE VALUE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND NEED I SAY THAT THE SIGN IS A SIGN. IT IS VISIBLE BY DAY AND IT'S VISIBLE BY NIGHT. IT SHINES ON THE WINDOWS OF MY HOUSE. AND MY NEIGHBOR, WHO IS ONE OF FOUR PEOPLE I KNOW WHO SUBMITTED DISAPPROVAL, NOT THREE. THIS IS THE VIEW FROM MY NEIGHBOR'S BEDROOM OF THE SIGN. THINK OF WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE AT NIGHT. IT'S AN R-1 ZONED NEIGHBORHOOD. MY HOUSE HAS BEEN THERE 120 YEARS AND HAS NEVER HAD A MOTEL SIGN ACROSS THE STREET FROM IT. BUT IF IT'S AN OBJECT, IT'S NEVER HAD AN OBJECT THAT HAS NEON SPELLING A WORD MOTEL. IT'S VISIBLE FROM THE STREET BY DAY. THE NEON SHINES ON AND REFLECTS ON THE WINDOWS OF RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS AT NIGHT. THE SIGN IS A SIGN. THE CODE IS CLEAR. THE CODE DOESN'T SAY WHAT IS NOT ALLOWED. IF YOU LOOK AT THE CODE AND I GAVE YOU GUYS CUT AND PASTE FROM THE CODE, IF YOU LOOK AT THE CODE, THE CODE SAYS WHAT IS ALLOWED. SO EVERYTHING ELSE IS NOT ALLOWED OR NEEDS TO GO THROUGH A PUBLIC PERMITTING PROCEDURE TO BE ALLOWED UNLESS ONE FINDS IT IN RUN TO GET SOMEBODY TO REDEFINE AN ENGLISH WORD IN ORDER TO PUT UP A SIGN IN THE MIDDLE OF A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. WHAT I ASK IS THAT YOU NOT LET THE CODE BE TRASHED BY SECRET REDEFINITION OF COMMONLY USED WORDS. LOOK AT THE NEWSPAPER ARTICLES ABOUT THE [INAUDIBLE]. AS I QUOTED IN MY FIRST SUBMISSION, CATHERINE GORMAN SAID WISELY THAT THE [INAUDIBLE] SIGN IS A SIGN. WHY IS IT A SIGN? BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE A SIGN. THE DEVELOPED PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE SAID, WELL, THE BUSINESS IS CLOSED, SO IT'S NOT A BUSINESS ANYMORE. IT'S AN OBJECT. BUT THEY DIDN'T. I ASK YOU TO PLEASE ENFORCE THE CODE AND HAVE THE SIGN MOVED. I HAVE NO ANIMUS TOWARDS THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT OR STAFF OR THE OWNER OF 3321. I'M HAPPY FOR 3321 TO MOVE THEIR SIGN AND ENJOY THEIR SIGN AS A PIECE OF ART SHINING ON THEMSELVES. I AM AGAINST THE SIGN SHINING ON THE STREET ADVERTISING THEIR BUSINESS ACROSS THE STREET FROM MY HOME AND SHINING OFF MY DOOR WHEN I WALK UP THE STEPS. THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. OKAY. DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR ME OR. YES. SO DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT AT THIS TIME? YES, SIR. HOW LONG HAS THIS SIGN BEEN THERE? AND THE MARSHAL CAME OUT BEFORE THE BUILDING WAS EVEN PAINTED BLACK. THE BUILDING WAS STILL YELLOW. THE MARSHAL CAME UP, THEY COVERED IT. AND WHEN THEY DID, THAT IS WHEN I SENT THE EMAIL TO THE PLANNING STAFF AND ASKED THEM TO BE A PART OF THE PUBLIC PROCEDURE. OKAY, SO IT'S TAKEN A WHILE TO GET IN FRONT OF YOU GUYS BECAUSE I WORK FOR A LIVING AND I HAVE MY OWN BUSINESS. THIS MORNING I WOKE UP AT TWO AND WAS TEACHING PEOPLE, PROJECT MANAGEMENT IN KUALA LUMPUR OR SAUDI, NORWAY AND OTHER COUNTRIES AROUND THE WORLD VIRTUALLY. ANYONE ELSE QUESTIONS? [00:20:01] OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. AT THIS TIME, I WILL ASK IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS. PLEASE COME FORWARD. SIGN IN. STATE YOUR NAME. YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO DO THIS. SO I GUESS WE'LL START RIGHT THERE. HI. GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYBODY. MY NAME IS PATRICK GURSKI AND I'M AN ATTORNEY AND I REPRESENT THE HOMEOWNER THAT OWNS THE SIGN. I AM HERE ON BEHALF OF MISS REAGAN MARKEY. SHE IS A LOCAL RESIDENT OF 15 YEARS. SHE IS A HOMEOWNER AND SHE IS A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER HERE IN THE CITY OF GALVESTON. AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, I, TOO, AM A RESIDENT. I'M A HOMEOWNER AND A TAXPAYER HERE IN THE CITY OF GALVESTON AS WELL. UM, IN ADDITION TO MR. DANNENMAIER, I'M ALSO A VETERAN. I'M AN ARMY VETERAN AND A VETERAN OF THE WAR IN AFGHANISTAN. SO WHEN I SPEAK TO YOU, I ALSO SPEAK AS SOMEONE WHO HAS RAISED HIS RIGHT HAND AND HAS VOWED TO UPHOLD THE LAWS AND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES AND THE STATE OF TEXAS. THE ISSUE TODAY IS WHETHER OR NOT THE CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT CITY STAFF MADE THE CORRECT DECISION WHEN THEY DECIDED WHETHER OR NOT THE HOTEL SIGN THAT THIS MARQUEE HAS ON HER GARAGE IS A SIGN UNDER THE ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON. THE CITY DETERMINED THAT THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION IS NO. AND TODAY, THE DECISION BEFORE YOU IS TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT CITY STAFF WAS CORRECT IN THEIR DECISION OR INCORRECT. AND SO IN ORDER TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION, I TURN TO THE CITY CODES AND HERE UNDER THE LDRS. A SIGN IS DEFINED AS ANY DEVICE OR STRUCTURE THAT IS INTENDED TO ATTRACT THE ATTENTION OF THE PUBLIC IN ORDER TO PROMOTE THE SALE OF A PRODUCT COMMODITY SERVICE AND FOR IDENTIFICATION AND OR FOR IDENTIFICATION. THE OPERATIVE WORDS THAT I'D LIKE TO FOCUS ON ARE IN ORDER TO PROMOTE THE SALE OF A PRODUCT, COMMODITY SERVICE AND OR FOR IDENTIFICATION. YES, IT DOES APPEAR AT FIRST GLANCE THAT SIGN IS A SIGN, BUT IT IS NOT. IT IS A PIECE OF ART. IT DOES NOT PROMOTE ANY PRODUCTS. IT DOES NOT PROMOTE ANY COMMODITIES SERVICES AND IT DOES NOT IDENTIFY A HOTEL. MISS MARKEY'S BUSINESS. SHE DOES NOT OPERATE A HOTEL. SHE DOES NOT OPERATE A HOTEL. OUT OF THAT OUT OF THAT LOCATION. SHE DOESN'T OPERATE AN AIRBNB, A SHORT TERM RENTAL OR ANYTHING ELSE OUT OF THAT LOCATION, THAT IS A GARAGE APARTMENT. AND SHE DECIDED TO DECORATE HER YARD WITH THAT SIGN THAT SHE BOUGHT IN ROUNDTOP, TEXAS. AND THAT WAS BUILT AND THAT WAS CREATED IN THE 1950S FOR A HOTEL IN GLADEWATER, TEXAS. AND WHEN YOU TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION, THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION IS THAT YOU MUST AFFIRM THE DECISION OF CITY STAFF IN THEIR INTERPRETATION OF THE ORDINANCE. NOW. YEAH. YOU HAD THREE MINUTES. YOU'RE ACTUALLY. AM I OVER? YES. OH, THANK YOU. SO AT THIS TIME. ANYONE ELSE? THREE MINUTES. ALL RIGHT. MY NAME IS LAURA PRATS. I'VE LIVED HERE SINCE I WAS TWO, SO I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THAT IS, 53 YEARS. I WAS WITH REAGAN WHEN SHE BOUGHT THE SIGN IN ROUNDTOP AND IT WAS SOLD UNDER ART WHEN YOU WENT UP TO BUY THE SIGN, THERE WERE OTHER ANTIQUE STREET SIGNS AND OTHER DECORATIVE ART. [00:25:01] THERE WERE LIGHTS. THERE WERE ALL THESE OTHER THINGS THAT YOU COULD PUT IN YOUR BACK YARD AS YARD ART. AND SO THE INTENT WHEN SHE BOUGHT IT WAS FOR IT TO BE YARD ART. AND THAT WAS THE INTENT. THAT'S WHY IT'S THERE. SHE'S A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. SHE HAS AND I'VE KNOWN HER FOR A VERY LONG TIME. SHE HAS BUILT SMALL HOMES IN THE PAST, BUT HER PRIMARY OCCUPATION IS A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. SHE'S NOT A MOTEL BUILDER. SHE'S NOT A HOME BUILDER. SHE'S BUILT SMALL HOMES IN THE PAST AS PART OF A SIDE BUSINESS. BUT HER PRIMARY INCOME PRODUCING STREAM IS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE. AND SO SHE IS VERY IN TUNE WITH YARD ART AND YARD DECORATIONS. AND SO THE INTENT WAS TO BUY YARD ART FOR HER BACK YARD. SO AND IT WAS SOLD AS YARD ART. SO THAT'S THE ONLY THING. I WAS THERE WHEN THE INTENT WAS BOUGHT JUST TO LET YOU KNOW THAT IT WAS NEVER BOUGHT WITH THE INTENT TO BE ANYTHING ELSE OTHER THAN A PIECE OF ART AND YARD ART. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? RICHARD ALVAREZ. I AM THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR WHO DID THE UPGRADES FOR MRS. MARKEY AT HER ADDRESS. 3321 AVENUE O. WHEN WE WHEN SHE OCCUPIED THE PROPERTY ABOUT A YEAR AGO, THERE WAS PROBABLY AT LEAST 3 TO 4 FAMILIES THAT HAD TO BE MOVED OUT FROM THE PROPERTY. I HEARD THE APPLICANT ADDRESS HIS CONCERNS WITH THE VALUE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE VALUES OF THEIR HOMES. IF ANYTHING, HE SHOULD BE APPLAUDING MS. MARKEY FOR WHAT SHE HAS DONE TO UPGRADE THE PROPERTY. IT WAS VERY BAD CONDITION. WE'VE CONDUCTED SO MUCH ROT REPAIRS, WINDOW REPLACEMENTS, ROOFING REPAIRS, LEVELING OF THE HOME, ALL PERMITTED PROJECTS. SHE WENT ON. WE PAINTED. SHE WANTED TO MAKE THE LANDSCAPE LOOK BETTER. PURCHASED HER YARD ART. IT WAS INSTALLED. AGAIN, THERE'S STILL CONTINUOUS UPGRADES HAPPENING ON THE FRONT STRUCTURE. IT'S A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, NOT A MOTEL. IT IS NOT AN AIRBNB. HE SHOULD BE THANKFUL OF THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE MOVED OUT FROM ACROSS THE STREET FROM HIM. THE TRASH TWO DUMPSTER FULLS THAT WERE HAULED OUT FROM THE PROPERTY. THE LIVING CONDITIONS WERE DEPLORABLE. AGAIN, YOU SHOULD REALLY RECONSIDER THE VALUE INCREASE THAT SHE HAS DONE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. ALSO, PROPERTY OWNER IN GALVESTON PAY TAXES AS WELL. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? LOOK. HERE WE GO. I FIGURED SINCE I OWN THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION, I MIGHT AS WELL COME UP AND SAY HEY. I'M REAGAN MARKEY AND I OWN 3321 AVENUE O. IT IS MY HOME, MY PRIMARY RESIDENCE, AND IS HOMESTEADED AS SUCH. THE ITEM IN QUESTION IS AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN, AN ART INSTALLATION. THE APPLICANT DOES NOT HAVE TO SHARE, IN MY OPINION, AND MY CREATIVE IDEA OF ART, AND I CAN RESPECT THAT. IT'S TOTALLY OKAY. AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT IS NOT FUNCTIONING AS A DEFINITION OF A SIGN AS PER THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. THAT IS WHAT WE GO BY WHEN WE DO ANY TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT OR PROJECT IN THE CITY. I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH IT DOING LANDSCAPE PROJECTS. I'M NOT A TINY HOTEL BUILDER. I HAPPEN TO LOVE BOUTIQUE HOTELS. IF YOU READ WHAT HE ACTUALLY PUT IN THERE AND I'VE PARTNERED WITH PEOPLE TO DO SOME DESIGN AND BUILD SOME SMALL STRUCTURES THAT HAVE BEEN SOLD. BUT I'M NOT A TINY HOTEL BUILDER. I WAS ALSO UNAWARE THAT THERE WAS A WAY THAT ART HAD TO FACE WHEN IT WAS HUNG IN ANY FACILITY. IF YOU GUYS NOTICE AND I'LL LET YOU GUYS HAVE COPIES OF THIS, THESE ARE ALL ART INSTALLATIONS ALL ACROSS THE CITY WHERE THERE ARE BEAUTIFUL MURALS PAINTED ON BUILDINGS. THERE ARE NEON ADDRESS PLAQUES ON BUILDINGS. [00:30:03] ALL OF THE THINGS THAT THE APPLICANT HAS AN ISSUE WITH ARE ALREADY ALL OVER TOWN. AND THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS I LOVE GALVESTON, BECAUSE IT IS A COMMUNITY THAT LOVES AND SUPPORTS ART. I AM CREATIVE BY NATURE AND THAT'S JUST WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO. AGAIN, I CAN RESPECT THE FACT THAT HE DOESN'T SHARE MY TASTE IN ART, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, I AM NOT IN VIOLATION OF ANY CITY CODES. SO I ASK THAT YOU UPHOLD THE CITY'S DETERMINATION AND THAT IS IT. AND I WILL LET YOU GUYS HAVE THESE. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? I'M MARGARET DANNENMAIER. AND SO FAR I'VE HEARD MULTIPLE PEOPLE REFER TO THIS AS A SIGN. HE REFERRED TO IT AS A SIGN. YOU REFERRED TO IT AS A SIGN YOU DID I'M SURE OTHER PEOPLE HAVE. IT'S A SIGN. AND THAT SIGN, WHILE IT IS AN ART INSTALLATION AND I LOVE ART, BUT IT ILLUMINATES ON OUR PROPERTY. SO WHAT SHE WAS REFERRING TO ABOUT GALVESTON AND ALL THEIR SIGNS, THOSE ARE PROBABLY NOT OUR ONE, YOU KNOW, AREAS. SO I AGREE THAT GALVESTON HAS, YOU KNOW, BEAUTIFIED ITS CITY WITH MULTIPLE SIGNS IN DIFFERENT AREAS. BUT THIS IS A RESIDENTIAL AREA AND IT'S YOU KNOW, WE DON'T BEGRUDGE HER HAVING IT, BUT IT SHOULD BE ON HER PROPERTY, NOT FACING THE STREET, NOT FACING OUR PROPERTY, NOT ILLUMINATING OUR PROPERTY AND OUR NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY. SO I'M A BOI SO, YOU KNOW, I LOVE GALVESTON AND I LOVE OUR NEIGHBORS. AND I JUST FEEL THAT IT SHOULDN'T BE THERE. OR IF SHE WANTS IT THERE, IT NEEDS TO BE MOVED TO HER SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. THAT'S IT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANYONE ELSE? SEEING NO ONE ELSE. I WILL NOW CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. NONE ON THE OTHER SIDE? YEAH. NO. OH. OKAY. HI, EVERYONE. I'M CHRISTINE HOPKINS, ALSO BORN ON THE ISLAND, LIVE MIDTOWN, RAISED HERE, HOMEOWNER PAY TAXES, ALL THE THINGS. AND I JUST WANT TO SAY, LIKE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT, GALVESTON REALLY HAS CHANGED SO MUCH, ESPECIALLY OVER THE LAST TEN YEARS. I THINK WE'D ALL AGREE ABOUT THAT. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS REFRESHING ABOUT IT IS, AS REAGAN MENTIONED AS WELL, AND AND OTHER PEOPLE IN THE ROOM, ART, I KNOW I SEE HOUSES THAT CHOOSE A COLOR I WOULD NEVER CHOOSE. THEY THEY MAY HAVE SOMETHING IN THEIR YARD THAT I DON'T QUITE LOVE. BUT AGAIN, THIS IS A PIECE OF ART THAT IS ON DISPLAY IN HER YARD. OBVIOUSLY, TO ANYONE WHO DRIVES BY, UNLESS YOU SLOW DOWN AND LOOK, IT'S PRETTY OBVIOUS IT'S NOT A MOTEL. SO I GUESS I JUST WANT TO SAY I SUPPORT HER AND I SUPPORT HER FREEDOM TO DISPLAY SOMETHING THAT SHE LOVES IN HER YARD. THANKS. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THE LAST CALL. ANYBODY? YES, SIR. COME ON FORWARD. I AM. I'M TYLER [INAUDIBLE]. I'M A SUBCONTRACTOR FOR REAGAN. I INSTALL LANDSCAPE LIGHTING ALL OVER YOUR CITY. WE GO INTO PEOPLE'S PROPERTIES, WE CLEAN THEM UP, WE MAKE THEM LOOK BETTER. SOMEBODY HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THE LUMENS OF THAT SIGN. THAT SIGN DOESN'T PUT OUT ANY MORE LIGHT THAN A FRONT PORCH LIGHT DOES. SO THE FACT THAT SOMEBODY'S CLAIMING THAT IT SHINES INTO THEIR WINDOW AND KEEPS THEM UP AT NIGHT, THAT'S WHY PEOPLE HAVE CURTAINS AND BLINDS. [00:35:06] BUT THAT LIGHT IS ALSO ON A SWITCH. IT'S NOT ON AUTOMATICALLY AT NIGHT. IT CAN BE TURNED ON AND OFF. AND SHE HAS TO PHYSICALLY GO TURN THAT ON WITH A SWITCH. SO BASICALLY, THE THING IN QUESTION, I MEAN, IT'S A PIECE OF ART. SHE'S USING HER, YOU KNOW, FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION. THAT'S ALL I REALLY HAVE TO SAY ABOUT IT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, HERE WE GO. ANYBODY ELSE? ALL RIGHT. NOW, I WILL OFFICIALLY CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION HERE FOR A MOTION. I MOTION. I MAKE A MOTION. ALL RIGHT. YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? THANK YOU. I AM GOING TO MOVE THAT WE AFFIRM PLANNING STAFFS DETERMINATION T HAT THE DISPLAYED ITEM DOES NOT MEET THE DEFINITION OF A SIGN UNDER THE LDR SECTION 5.201 NUMBER 35. I'LL SECOND IT. ALL RIGHT. WE DO HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND NOW, IS THERE TO TO AFFIRM STAFF'S DECISION. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? I HAVE SOMETHING, CAROL. I CAN'T VOTE. OKAY. I CAN'T VOTE. I'M AN ALTERNATE. I'M JUST HERE TO LISTEN AND TO TALK EVIDENTLY. YOU KNOW WHAT? TO ME, THIS IS A NEIGHBORHOOD SITUATION WHERE PEOPLE DISAGREE ABOUT ONE THING OR ANOTHER. IN MY MIND, I THINK IT WOULD BE REALLY NEIGHBORLY TO BE AWARE OF YOUR NEIGHBORS CONCERNS ABOUT THE LIGHT. AND JUST IF YOU WANT TO TURN YOUR YOUR YOUR OBJECT DE ART ON, TURN IT ON DURING THE DAY AND BE AWARE THAT YOUR NEIGHBORS MAY TURN IN EARLY AT NIGHT AND THEY MIGHT LIKE A LITTLE LESS AMBIENT LIGHT. THAT'S TO ME, THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT'S THE REAL ISSUE HERE IS WHETHER YOU'RE INFRINGING ON SOMEBODY ELSE'S RIGHT TO PRIVACY AND RIGHT TO DO TO LIVE THEIR LIVES. AND I THINK THE APPLICANT ALSO HAS TO RECOGNIZE THAT ART IS IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER. AND IT'S REALLY LOVELY TO SEE DIFFERENT TYPES OF ART. I THINK GALVESTON IS WONDERFUL FOR ITS ART EXPRESSION, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, LET'S NOT MAKE IT OBNOXIOUS TO THE POINT WHERE YOU HAVE TO HIRE A LAWYER. YOU KNOW, THAT'S THAT TO ME IS IS SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO WORK OUT AS NEIGHBORS. AND I HOPE WE STILL HAVE THAT KIND OF NEIGHBORLINESS IN OUR COMMUNITY. WE'RE LOSING IT TO A LARGE PART BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW OUR NEIGHBORS ANYMORE. AND WHERE I LIVE, YOU KNOW, I DRIVE INTO MY DRIVEWAY AND I GO INTO MY GARAGE AND THE GARAGE DOOR COMES DOWN AND I DON'T EVER HAVE TO COME OUT OF MY HOUSE AND SEE MY NEIGHBORS IF I DON'T MAKE AN EFFORT. AND I'M JUST I'M SORRY IF I'M PREACHING TO THE CHOIR, BUT I JUST WOULD REALLY LOVE IT IF YOU GUYS COULD LOOK AT EACH OTHER EYEBALL TO EYEBALL AND SAY, LET'S BE FRIENDS. LET'S WORK THIS OUT LOCALLY. THANK YOU. I'M SORRY TOO. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? I'D LIKE TO JUST SAY THAT THANKS, CAROL. I MEAN, ALL THOSE THINGS ARE IMPORTANT, BUT, YOU KNOW, IN THE END, IN THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT THIS THIS COUNCIL IS THIS BOARD IS RULED BY THE LDR. AND THE LDR IS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD ABOUT ITS DEFINITIONS, HOW THEY APPLY WHEN THEY APPLY. THERE'S NOT A LOT OF WIGGLE ROOM IN THERE FOR ANYTHING. AND THAT'S THAT'S OUR THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GUIDED BY SO. THANKS. ALL RIGHT, JAMES. ALTERNATE LOCATIONS FOR THE SIGN. I DIDN'T HEAR ANY SPECIFIC ALTERNATE IDEAS OF. I'M NOT SURE, BUT THAT'S NOT THE QUESTION WE HAVE IT'S KIND OF ALONG WITH WHAT SHE'S TALKING ABOUT, WHERE IT'S LESS INTRUSIVE ON THE NEIGHBORS. THAT'S NOT THE ISSUE. THAT'S NOT THE ISSUE HERE. OKAY. WELL A SIGN IS A SIGN. [00:40:02] AND IF I WENT SOMEWHERE AND I SAW THIS, I WOULD SAY I'M LOOKING AT A SIGN. OKAY. ANY MORE DISCUSSION? I WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS IT A LITTLE. I MEAN, IT ALL MAKES SENSE WHAT EVERYBODY IS SAYING. BUT THAT'S ONLY BECAUSE YOU KNOW THE SITUATION UP CLOSELY AND PERSONALLY. LIKE, YOU KNOW, YOU INSTALLED THAT PIECE OF ART THERE. AND I CAN APPRECIATE A PIECE OF ART WHEN I HEAR IT FROM THE ARTIST ITSELF OR THE PERSON THAT BOUGHT IT. BUT FOR A REGULAR PERSON DRIVING THERE OR GOING ON GOOGLE LOOKING AT HOUSES IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, THAT THE ASSUMPTION IS THERE IS A MOTEL. JUST LIKE IF YOU PUT UP AN OLD STOP SIGN SOMEWHERE, YOU'LL STOP BECAUSE IT'S A STOP SIGN NO MATTER THE INTENTION OF WHOEVER PUT IT THERE. SO IF OUR JOB TODAY IS TO DETERMINE IF IT'S A SIGN OR NOT. THAT'S NOT THE ISSUE. NO, THE ISSUE IS, IS IT A SIGN OR NOT? IN MY EYES OKAY. WHAT IS CAN YOU READ IT TO ME, PLEASE? PARDON ME. [INAUDIBLE] LET'S READ IT. THE DEFINITION AGAIN. LET ME JUST TELL YOU REAL QUICK. IT HAS TO BE INTENDED. THE OBJECT THAT'S THE SIGN HAS TO BE THE INTENT HAS TO BE TO ATTRACT PUBLIC ATTENTION IN ORDER TO PROMOTE THE SALE OF A PRODUCT OR A COMMODITY OR A SERVICE. THAT'S IMPORTANT. AND IT'S NOT INTENDED FOR IDENTIFICATION. IT ISN'T INTENDED. SO SHE IS NOT ATTRACTING. SHE DID NOT PUT THE ITEM OUT ON HER HOUSE TO ATTRACT PUBLIC ATTENTION TO A PRODUCT OR A COMMODITY OR ANYTHING ELSE. AND IF IT'S NOT, IF IT DOESN'T MEET THAT STRICT PARAMETER, THEN UNDER THE LDR, IT'S NOT A SIGN AND IT'S NOT SUBJECT TO THE RULES OF A SIGN. HE SAID IT IS IN CONFLICT WITH THE R-1 RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY REQUIREMENTS FOR THE SIZE. IF YOU HAVE A SIGN THAT MEETS THAT THAT PARAMETER FOR L-1, IF YOU HAVE ONE, THEN THAT SIZE DESCRIPTION MATTERS. BUT IN THIS CASE, WE DON'T HAVE ONE THAT MEETS THE DEFINITION UNDER THE LDR ONLY OF A SIGN. SO YOU CAN'T. THAT'S THE END OF THE DISCUSSION. SO FOR EVERY SIGN ALIKE OBJECT EVERYWHERE, WE SHOULD BASICALLY KNOW THE INTENTION OF THE PERSON THAT PUT IT THERE. OR FIRST OF ALL, YOU HAVE TO KNOW WHAT THE ZONING DISTRICT IS, RIGHT? THAT'S THAT'S IMPORTANT. SO IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE'RE R-1 HERE. OKAY, SO THE R-1 ZONING DISTRICT ONLY ALLOWS FOR ONE NAMEPLATE SIGN SIZE NOT TO EXCEED TWO SQUARE FEET. AND THAT THAT WOULD MEET THE DEFINITION OF A SIGN FOR L-1. OKAY. IN THE LDR. IT'S NOT PROMOTING A PRODUCT, A COMMODITY OR A SERVICE. IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, IF I READ THAT RIGHT HERE, ALLOWABLE SIGNAGE IS REGULATED BY ZONING DISTRICT. THE PROPERTY IS ZONED RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY R-1 THE R-1 ZONING DISTRICT ONLY ALLOWS FOR ONE NAMEPLATE SIGN AND WITH THE SIGN NOT TO EXCEED TWO SQUARE FEET. OKAY, NOW I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT JUMPS BACK TO THIS LDR OF ADVERTISING BUSINESS. OKAY? I MEAN, THIS IS A NEIGHBORHOOD, RIGHT? I KNOW IT'S NOT INTENDED TO ADVERTISE A BUSINESS. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT IF IT'S A SIGN. IT'S NOT A SIGN UNDER THE DEFINITION. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GUIDED BY. WE CAN'T. IT'S NOT A SIGN UNDER THE DEFINITION OF A COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENT. WELL, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT COMMERCIAL. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RESIDENTS HERE SO. BUT THAT WOULD APPLY IF IT WAS COMMERCIAL. WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT A COMMERCIAL. I DON'T KNOW. I HAVEN'T STUDIED THAT. BUT WHY DOES RESIDENTIAL NOT TAKE PRECEDENT OVER LDR? I COULDN'T ANSWER THAT FOR YOU. IT'S THE LAW WE DON'T GET TO, YOU KNOW. [00:45:03] AND BY THE SAME TOKEN, THE NAMEPLATE SIGN THAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT, IF I HAVE AN AIRBNB, I CAN'T PUT UP A GIANT SIGN ON THE FRONT OF MY AIRBNB THAT SAYS STAY HERE AT THIS AIRBNB. BUT THE SIGN THAT SHE HAS DOES NOT MEET THE DEFINITION OF A SIGN. AND THAT'S AND WE'RE BOUND BY THAT. THE DISPLAYED THE DISPLAYED OBJECT. THAT'S WHAT WE ARE GOING TO CALL IT, AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO CALL IT A SIGN ANYMORE. THE DISPLAYED OBJECT DOESN'T MEET THE DEFINITION OF A SIGN BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO TAKE BOTH PARTS OF THE DEFINITION. WE'LL JUST STOP AT ANY DEVICE OR STRUCTURE THAT IS INTENDED. WELL, THERE'S THREE PARTS TO IT. AND YEAH, IT'S ACTUALLY ALL RIGHT THERE. YEAH. YEAH. SO. OKAY. ANY MORE DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO REMIND YOU ALL THAT THAT THE MOTION BEFORE US IS TO AFFIRM STAFF'S DECISION. RIGHT. RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. ALL IN FAVOR. I'M SORRY. I THINK WE SHOULD A LITTLE MORE DISCUSS THIS BECAUSE. OKAY. BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY, AS OF RIGHT NOW, WE KNOW HOW THE VOTE IS GOING TO END. SO IT SEEMS LIKE WE DON'T AGREE WITH THE DEFINITION FIRST OF ALL, I KNOW THAT'S NOT THE FINAL VOTE FOR, BUT IS THAT TRUE? LIKE WE DON'T AGREE WITH THE DEFINITION THAT WE HAVE? I DIDN'T HEAR THAT. I MEAN, THE DEFINITION IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN AGREE WITH OR NOT AGREE WITH. THE DEFINITION IS WHAT IT IS. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE BOUND BY. RIGHT. AND WHETHER WE AGREE WITH IT OR NOT, THAT'S WHAT IT IS. I AGREE WITH THE DEFINITION. MAYBE I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING YOUR QUESTION. WE ARE ALL SAYING, YES, WE AGREE THE DEFINITION SAYS THAT. BUT COMMON SENSE REALLY LIKE YOU HAVE TO KNOW THE CASE VERY PERSONALLY TO KNOW THE INTENT. YOU CAN'T HAVE THE INTENT WHEN THE ASSUMPTION IS DIFFERENT. LIKE WE CAN'T UNDERSTAND THE INTENT OF INDIVIDUALS AROUND TOWN WHEN THE LIKE THE OBVIOUSLY IT MEANS SOMETHING. IT'S LETTERS, IT'S WORD THAT HAS A MEANING BY DEFINITION WHAT'S MOTEL BY DEFINITION. YOU KNOW, THE INTENT. I MEAN THAT THAT'S A GOOD POINT. BUT THIS ISN'T A SUBJECTIVE ITEM. IT'S VERY OBJECTIVE. WE HAVE CERTAIN PARAMETERS THAT WE CAN'T GO BEYOND. AND IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT THE INTENT IS OR ANYTHING ELSE. IF THE DISPLAYED OBJECT DOESN'T MEET THAT DEFINITION, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE ALLOWED. OKAY. DONNA, I DON'T TYPICALLY INTERRUPT WHEN THE COMMISSION STARTS DELIBERATING, BUT FROM WHAT I'M HEARING, I FEEL THE NEED TO JUST MAKE SOME CLARIFICATIONS FROM WHAT I'VE HEARD. BECAUSE, AGAIN, I'M HERE TO PROTECT THE RECORD. THE BOARD NEEDS TO DISTINGUISH WHAT IS BEING DISPLAYED WITH THE WORDS WITH THE LETTERS OF WHAT'S BEING DISPLAYED. AND WHAT I MEAN TO SAY IS THE BOARD IS NOT HERE TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE WORD MOTEL. IS A SIGN. OR JUST THE OBJECT ITSELF IS A SIGN BECAUSE YOU REMEMBER FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS PROHIBIT US F ROM REGULATING AN OBJECT BASED JUST ON THE VERBIAGE. THERE ARE SOME CLEAR PARAMETERS. OBSCENITY, DEFAMATION, THINGS LIKE THAT THAT GOVERNMENTS CAN REGULATE AGAINST. SO MAYBE IT WILL BE HELPFUL IF THE BOARD CAN LOOK AT THIS AS ARE WE REALLY LOOKING AT THE WORD MOTEL AND TRYING TO REGULATE THAT WORD OR JUST THE FOUR BY FIVE OR WHATEVER IT IS WHICH IS ILLUMINATED? MAYBE IT WAS JUST HAPPY FACES. WOULD THERE BE AN ISSUE IF IT WAS THE WORD HAPPY? WOULD IT BE AN ISSUE? SO I'M THINKING I'M HEARING MORE DISCUSSION ON THE WORD MOTEL THEN JUST [00:50:10] BEING THE DISPLAYED OBJECT. SO I WOULD LIKE THE BOARD TO REALLY LOOK AT THAT. CAN I SAY SOMETHING? YES. THANK YOU, COUNSELOR. I THINK IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO REALIZE WHAT OUR WORK, OUR JOB IS HERE TODAY, AND THAT'S TO DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT T HE PLANNING STAFF'S DEFINITION REGARDING A SIGN SHOULD BE AFFIRMED OR NOT. AND WE HAVEN'T FOUND ANY REASON UNDER THE DEFINITIONS TO NOT AFFIRM THIS. IT'S PRETTY. WE'VE HEARD FROM THE OWNER. WE'VE HEARD FROM PEOPLE WHO'VE WORKED FOR THE OWNER. I CERTAINLY DON'T THINK ANYBODY IS LYING. AND DEFINITELY THAT DISPLAYED OBJECT IS NOT PERFORMING THE FUNCTION THAT THE LDR SAYS A SIGN MUST, MUST DO SO. OKAY. ANY MORE DISCUSSION? ARE YOU OKAY? HERE WE GO. JUST TO BE CLEAR. OKAY. I DO AGREE WITH THE DEFINITION BEING SAYING THAT BECAUSE THE DEFINITION ITSELF, IT HAS INTENDED, WHICH IS NOT A CLEAR ANYTHING. ANYBODY CAN INTEND SOMETHING AND UNINTENDED THE NEXT DAY. SO THE DEFINITION, HAVING THE INTENT IN IT, IT'S JUST A DIFFERENT ISSUE THAT AGREED. WE'RE NOT HERE TO SOLVE THAT TODAY. BUT I JUST WANTED TO DISCUSS THAT BECAUSE IT'S DEFINITELY NOT A CLEAR, I BELIEVE, YES OR NO ANSWER TODAY. SO I JUST WANTED TO DISCUSS THAT PART OF THE DEFINITION. THANKS. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT. ANY MORE? YOU, SIR. NO, I'M GOOD WITH LDR, OKAY, DEFINITION ON THIS. AND MOTEL DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT. I'M THINKING SIGN. OKAY. IT COULD SAY HAPPY DAYS OR WHATEVER. AND I'VE WATCHED NUMEROUS PICKERS SHOWS AND WHERE THEY GO OUT AND THEY FIND SIGNS AND, YOU KNOW, THEY CALL THEM OBJECTS THAT PEOPLE WOULD LIKE TO DISPLAY. SO, YOU KNOW, I COULD SEE WHERE IT CAN FALL INTO THAT SAME CATEGORY AS THAT SO, YOU KNOW. AND THEN IT'S THE PERSON DISPLAYING IT THAT'S DETERMINED THAT IT'S THAT TYPE OF OBJECT. ARE YOU GOOD? OKAY, ONE MORE TIME. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO REMIND THE THE BOARD THAT WE ARE THE MOTION BEFORE THE BOARD IS TO AFFIRM THE CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S DECISION. RIGHT. OKAY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR FOR AFFIRM. RAISE YOUR HAND. ALL OPPOSED SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIED. THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS THE RECOGNITION OF BILL CLEMENT. WHERE IS BILL CLEMENT? WELL, I FORGOT TO INVITE BILL CLEMENT. BOARD. ALL RIGHT. HAVE A PARTY. AND YOU KNOW YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO COME. SO DISCUSSION OF UP TO DATE, VIDEO CONFERENCE ATTENDANCE PROCEDURE. YOU MAY HAVE NOTICED THAT THERE WAS SOME DIFFERENT TERMINOLOGY ON THE TOP OF YOUR AGENDA. THERE'S THERE'S BEEN A CHANGE TO THE WAY THE PUBLIC IS NOTIFIED THAT THAT MEMBERS OF THE BOARD ARE GOING TO BE PARTICIPATING VIRTUALLY. AND IT'S GOTTEN A LOT MORE FLEXIBLE. SO THERE'S JUST THIS STANDARD LANGUAGE THAT ONE OR MORE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD MAY ATTEND THE MEETING BY VIDEO CONFERENCE. [00:55:08] SO IF YOU HAVE A NEED TO ATTEND BY VIDEO CONFERENCE, YOU DON'T HAVE TO GIVE US. WE USED TO ASK FOR A SEVEN DAY ADVANCE NOTICE AND YOU HAD TO GIVE US THE ADDRESS OF WHERE YOU WOULD BE. ALL THAT'S GONE AWAY. SO YOU JUST HAVE TO REACH OUT TO MYSELF OR TO KARINA AND SAY THAT YOU'LL NEED TO PARTICIPATE VIRTUALLY AND WE CAN SET THAT UP FOR YOU AND WE CAN DO THAT UP UNTIL, YOU KNOW, THE DAY OF THE MEETING. SO IF PEOPLE ARE PARTICIPATING, VIRTUALLY, THERE DOES HAVE TO BE A QUORUM OF MEMBERS PHYSICALLY PRESENT. THERE YOU GO. SO THERE HAVE TO BE AT LEAST FOUR OF US, CORRECT? AT LEAST FOUR OF YOU WOULD HAVE TO BE PRESENT. AND THE PERSON LEADING THE MEETING HAS TO BE PRESENT. SO IF THE CHAIR HAS TO PARTICIPATE VIRTUALLY, THEN EITHER THE VICE CHAIR OR THE MOST SENIOR MEMBER RUNS THE MEETING. SO JUST TO UPDATE YOU GUYS, COUNCIL DOES HAVE TO APPROVE AND I BELIEVE IT'S IT'S CAROL'S TURN RIGHT AS FIRST ALTERNATE. WELL SHE'S THE LONGEST SERVING ALTERNATE SO THEY DO HAVE TO APPROVE THE ELEVATION OF A A LTERNATE TO THE BOARD BECAUSE BILL IS GONE. THERE YOU GO. AND ONCE THEY DO THAT, THEN WE CAN ALSO CHOOSE A VICE CHAIR. YEP. SO WE'LL DO THAT. WE'LL PUT THAT ON THE AGENDA FOR OCTOBER IF WE HAVE A MEETING. OKAY. AND I THINK THIS MONTH IS GOING TO BE TWO YEARS FOR ME, SO I FILLED OUT ANOTHER APPLICATION A FEW MONTHS AGO. OKAY, SO YEAH, IF YOU FILLED OUT AN APPLICATION WITH THE CITY SECRETARY, THEN YOU'LL BE ON FILE. ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING ELSE? DONNA YOU GOOD? THIS AFTERNOON I APPRECIATE THE WAY THE BOARD MEMBERS SPOKE WITH EACH OTHER AND TO EACH OTHER AND RESPECTED THEIR THOUGHTS AND IDEAS AND HOW THE EXPLANATIONS OF FOLKS MINDSETS ON THEIR INTERPRETATION OF WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT. IT IS A VERY IT WAS A VERY GOOD MEETING. I REALLY ENJOYED THE PARTICIPATION THAT I SAW THIS AFTERNOON. SO IT WAS VERY THOUGHTFUL. I APPRECIATE THAT VERY MUCH. NO, NO, NO, YOU DON'T. WE ARE ADJOURNED. I JUST GOT A TEXT FROM BILL. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.