Okay, good morning, everyone, and welcome to the downtown review board meeting for September 2nd, 2025.

We're starting just a little bit late, so apologies for some technical difficulties.

My name is Bobby Mikolas in the absence of Chair Lord, I'll be chairing this morning.

The downtown review board meets monthly to review downtown development applications using the downtown Colorado Springs Forum-based code regulating plan.

The downtown review board is comprised of nine members appointed by a city council.

Board members are community volunteers with expertise across a wide variety of disciplines.

Each member acts independently, carefully assessing all the evidence presented to make their decision.

And just to clarify, when an item is presented, um staff will present the item followed by the applicant present presentation.

Public comment will be open for those in support of the item, followed by public comment for those in opposition with the applicant responding or re rebutting.

Um and then public comment will close as the item is brought up to the dais for discussion.

I don't believe we have any changes to the agenda or postponements, and so I'll look to Ryan T.

Urban Planning Manager for Communications this morning.

Thanks, Mr.

Chair, members of the downtown review board, Ryan T.

Fortiller with the city planning department.

Um just a couple quick communications.

Uh first and foremost, thanks everyone for participating and coming today.

I know it's been a few months and uh so we just haven't had any applications for you to review, but uh we appreciate you being here and making time this morning.

So thank you.

Um I first want to introduce uh Solange Bacero Mesa.

Uh Solange, you want to wave your hand over there?

Solange started uh late May, early June, I believe.

Uh she is our senior business support specialist and will be assisting Melissa uh at our regular DRB meetings.

Um so uh if you ever need anything, you can reach out to myself or Solange or Melissa.

So uh welcome to Solange.

Um DRB appointments.

There are two DRB members who whose terms expired, technically expired earlier uh early last month.

Um Amanda being one of them and Max Cronstadt being the other.

Um uh I have been working with council staff for a number of months to address those uh term expirations.

Um I believe Amanda finally has a discussion set up with our council liaison, Brandy Williams, uh, in the near future, and assuming that goes well, I believe Amanda will be reappointed by council later this month.

Um Max had expressed the um the thought to allow someone else to fill his position if there was someone else that was interested.

Max has one of our or the has the um adjacent neighborhood uh seat on the DRB and uh the Shooks Run neighborhood has identified a candidate, and that candidate will be also having a discussion with councilwoman Williams in the very near future, and we might see that appointment later this month.

So um I I was hoping Max would be here today just to be able to thank him for his service over the last few years.

Um, so if you see him, be sure to pass along those words.

Um, because he may not technically be on the board uh at our next meeting in October.

Excuse me, Ryan.

Yes, go ahead.

Before we proceed, could we do attendance, please?

Oh, yeah.

Okay, yeah, I think we skipped that.

Sorry.

Yeah, that's a that's a good point.

Go ahead.

Yeah, Solange, thank you.

Will you please uh call rolling board member Nolette Board Member Kuzman?

Here board member Coates.

Board member Hensler here.

Chair Lord Board Member Friesma.

Here board member Mikulas here.

Board member Luciano here.

Board member Pence.

Okay.

Okay.

Thank you.

We have six members present.

Thank you, Solange.

And appreciate you bringing that to our attention, Ryan.

You can continue with any further communications.

Yeah, thank you, Mr.

Chair.

My apologies as well for the oversight.

And I did as far as roll call is concerned.

I just did want to point out that board member Nolette is on.

And I don't think his audio worked when we said that.

So we I got a thumbs up.

So he's uh uh just just take note you may need to use the chat.

I we couldn't hear you when you said here.

No, still can't hear you.

Not sure.

You're you're definitely not muted.

Um but uh I see your hand is raised.

Um by the time we get to the vote on the item, either we'll figure that out or we'll just look to you for some other visual indication of vote.

Um I see Young nodding his head.

So um just be aware of that.

Um sorry.

Um I and I did see Troy Member Coates jump on at one point uh very briefly, but then he jumped off.

So um we'll just note that as well.

Uh my last communication, and then we'll turn it back to the board for uh regular business here.

Is I generally try to give you guys an update of your next meeting.

The next meeting's scheduled for October 7th.

I don't believe we're gonna have any action items, but we absolutely will meet.

Um the consultant team for the update to the downtown master plan would like to give the DRB a uh early insight into their efforts and their work and everything that's being done uh with stakeholder involvement and drafting of uh the update to the plan.

Um it won't be before you for action for adoption until early next year, but this is an effort that they are making to um bring the DRB members up to speed on their efforts.

Um so we will have that.

I think Young is also going to do an ethics training, uh your annual ethics training at the October meeting.

Um so please do keep that on your calendar.

I believe that's the seventh.

And and obviously if you're not if you're out of town or unavailable, just let us know so we can be sure that we uh have a quorum.

Um back to the on the master plan presentation.

You should know that they are also scheduled to present to uh planning commission at their October um informal or work session meeting.

Uh and then they will be giving a presentation to city council at a work session uh in late October.

I believe it's the 27th.

So if you want just as much as you can get about master plan update, uh key take note of those opportunities as well.

Uh those are all the communications I have, Mr.

Chair.

Okay, thank you, Ryan.

Um yeah, and to Max, Max brought a really unique perspective, and I really always appreciated his input on our board, and so um make sure we reach out and thank Max if he doesn't find his way back on here.

So we'll look to the approval of minutes from our most recent board meeting, which was May 6, 2025.

This is item DRB 2299, the meetings for May 6th, downtown revore review review board meeting, and I'll look for a motion.

I'll move to approve the meetings for the downtown review board on May 6th, was it?

Yes, okay.

I'll second.

Okay, looks like we have a motion to approve in a second.

Please vote on your tablet.

I'm voting aye.

Board member no let how do you vote?

Thank you.

Young Chin for the city attorney's office.

Board member Nolette, if you don't mind just typing aye or no in the chat, please.

Okay.

Thank you so long for that.

Um, I don't see any items on the consent calendar.

Items called off consent or unfinished business.

So we will look now to new business and Solange.

I'm going to ask you to read the first item into the record.

Item 8A F B Z N 25-0005.

A form-based zone rent to City Code section 7.4.1307, allowing for two freestanding signs where one is allowed, located at 316 North De Honda Street.

Your presenter is Ethan Schaefer.

Good afternoon, or good morning, board members.

My name is Ethan Schaefer.

I use they and he pronouns.

And this is the first time that I've got to present to you all.

So I'm happy to be here and work with you all.

I'm here today to talk to you about the um uh sign or the FBZ warrant uh for sign standards within the form-based zone for um a restaurant called Latin Social.

Um, here we go.

Um, this the address is located at 316 North Tejone Street, um, northwest of the East Platte Avenue and North Tejone Street intersections.

It is currently zoned FBZ T2A, which is the form-based zone in the transition sector 2A.

The site is 0.43 acres in size and is uh currently in proposed uh for restaurant use.

And we are looking at a sign warrant today.

The project proposals to allow for two freestanding signs where one is allowed within the district.

And as you can see on oh, let me skip up there.

We go.

As you can see on here on the left-hand side of that image is where you can see where the sign is being proposed as you enter um the ramp to uh this location.

There'll be some more images as well as we continue on in the presentation.

Um this proposed sign is for Latin Social, and that currently mirrors the existing sushi row sign mounted on the retaining wall uh to the north.

It's on the uh right side of the image here.

You can see the um the black kind of stained metal sign in that rendering on the right hand side of the image.

That sign currently exists today.

I'll have another image of it as well.

Um the proposed sign is on the left side of the image there as you enter into um that ramp wrapping around the existing retaining wall.

The form based code also supports one primary long-term sign per business to serve as its main identifier.

So that is kind of a that is another basis uh for this request.

Is there a two commercial uh restaurant uses within this building?

Currently the existing sushi row restaurant and the proposed Latin Social Restaurant.

As you can see on the image here, um, the proposed sign is wrapping around that retaining wall.

It has three facade areas.

Um, one as you're facing uh the uh the ramp, you can see the logo.

As you enter the ramp on your left hand side, you see the part of the sign that says Latin, and then right in front of you it wraps around to say social as you're as you're uh going across that ramp there.

Um this proposed sign enhances the pedestrian experience um and complements the build the existing building architecture, primarily a lot of the uses in regards to the metals that are part of this building's design.

Um staff believes that this sign is extremely complimentary to those uh aspects of the structure itself.

And then also utilizing the existing built uh form of the pedestrian experience as part of the updates to this building in the last couple of years.

There's been a major focus on um on the pedestrian experience and tying in this structure that sits pretty far back on the lot compared to a lot of structures downtown, being able to tie in the pedestrian and kind of outdoor seating areas into those that are passers-by interested potentially in engaging with this commercial structure.

Um and then also the uses exist the use it's proposed to use existing structures to maintain a cohesive pedestrian-friendly streetscape, as I was kind of identifying there.

That retaining wall exists for the purpose of supporting that uh pedestrian ramp that you see there.

So there's no new proposed structures.

The sign would be attached to the existing.

We publicly noticed this application at time of internal review and prior to the DRB hearing today.

We noticed this uh via postcards uh to property owners within 500 feet of the site.

98 postcards were sent out, and one comment was received.

That comment was received from the downtown partnership, Austin Wilson with the downtown partnership, specifically stating that the property will be hosting two restaurants, Sushi Row and Latin Social.

So it would make logical sense for each business to be allowed a freestanding sign.

Um next, I'm going to invite our sign code administrator, uh Kurt Schmidt up to talk about his comments in regards to the application review.

Good morning, board members, uh Chair.

Uh my name is Kurt Schmidt.

I'm the city's uh program administrator for sign review.

Uh ultimately I was uh uh buck slip this process and review uh after the application.

However, it was submitted prior to the warrant uh as a sign permit, and uh we ended up having to um deny the application because of the criteria and city code that allows only one sign per parcel or property.

Um ultimately reviewed uh the signs and looked at them.

Uh both the signs together don't exceed what the property would be allowed to have as far as uh the one sign.

So we would be uh far within the the square footage uh allowance uh and also the height.

Um freestanding signs essentially are uh external to any of the buildings.

So even though it's on a retaining wall, we still classify them as freestanding signs, and that's how we had to classify it in code.

So um, if there's any questions that you have for me, feel free to ask.

Thank you.

Staff finds that this sign proposal, although um sign standards are not a major aspect of uh our plan COS, our comprehensive plan.

Staff does find that the proposal is in compliance with the general uh big ideas and strategies of plan COS.

The criteria for approval of a warrant, as you all are likely familiar, um, is that the requested warrant is consistent with the intent of the form-based code?

Is the requested warrant as well as the project as a whole consistent with section four, the design guidelines of the form-based code?

Is the requested warrant reasonable due to the proposed project's exceptional civic or environmental design?

Is the requested warrant consistent with the downtown master plan?

And is the requested warrant consistent with the city's comprehensive plan?

After evaluation of the warrant, staff finds the application does meet the review criteria, and the applicant is also here today and will be able to speak more to that as well for you in one moment.

Some optional motions for the board as well today.

Um, a motion for approval and a motion for denials up on the screen for you.

And last but certainly not least, do you have any questions for me?

I do.

Um you mentioned that the form-based code promotes one sign per business.

And so we have a lot of multiple tenant buildings downtown.

I'm just a little curious why this is being brought before us.

Absolutely.

Um so after speaking with the applicant and reviewing the application specifically, um, this site's design in terms of its uh lawn frontage compared to other commercial uh businesses and structures uh within the form-based area is unique.

This building is set fairly far back from the pedestrian way.

And so, in terms of a wall sign and the current architecture of the structure, it can be pretty difficult to manage a sign that effectively communicates what's happening in that structure.

I think you could get a pretty decent logo on the facade of this building, but it's not necessarily going to communicate what the name of that business is.

And so that's why, for instance, the existing sushi row sign was put into play.

Um, it was able to communicate the name of the st of the business there while also complementing the existing and proposed architecture at that time.

And so in the review of this application, staff felt that it was reasonable to look at uh a warrant to those standards to allow a similar sign to be placed that could also communicate in the same way.

So it's because it's not on the building itself.

Correct.

Yeah, when you have a when you have a sign um that's affixed to a structure other than the facade of the primary building, it's considered a freestanding sign.

More often than not, you see that happen.

You're building a structure for a sign with a freestanding sign.

In this case, it's being affixed to an existing retaining wall, and that would still classify it as freestanding, which only one freestanding sign is permitted per site.

And because the existing sushi row sign is also affixed to a retaining wall like structure and not on the facade of the building, that's counting against that um uh maximum of one.

Don't think we have any further questions.

Thank you for the presentation.

Absolutely.

I'll invite Scott up to come speak on behalf of the applicant.

Good morning.

My name is Scott Schuster.

I'm uh owner with Echo Architecture who is the applicant for this request.

And can you guys see the uh the images that Ethan pulled up?

Yeah, some of these are the same ones in his staff report, so I'll try not to reiterate too much of the same points.

But just wanted to help you visualize what this request was for.

Um as he stated, uh, we're only allowed to have one freestanding sign.

And the definition for the UDC for a freestanding sign is a sign that is not attached to a building and is permanently affixed in or upon the ground on one or more structural supports.

A freestanding sign shall include but is not limited to a pole monument or low profile type sign, where the definition of a wall-mounted sign is a commercial sign attached to and completely supported by exterior walls.

So we're kind of between definitions, and I feel like we're trying to meet the intent of what the uh what the requirement is.

So let me page through if you want to go to the next page.

So here's some images of the existing sushi row, which I assume you guys are familiar with with their existing steel plate uh freestanding sign that is attached to the uh retaining wall in a similar way to what we are proposing.

Yeah, and just to reiterate some of these definitions, um the two definitions are at the very top of the page.

But a freestanding sign and a wall sign um are kind of nuanced.

And like I said, I think we are meeting what the intent is for those requirements, as we have been identified for our signage as being freestanding signs.

But we feel that two individual two individual signs are necessary for each business.

And that is basically it.

You guys have any questions?

Uh I do have one question.

Was the thinking uh that this sign needed to be more direct to the new use, the Latin social, then say adding signage to the existing sign?

Could you repeat that?

Like in one scenario, you could um add some additional signage to the existing sign where sushi row is rather than building a new structure or using a new structure.

Was that considered uh no because the the two tenant suites are quite delineated by kind of the circulation space, so they are it's pretty clearly split.

Yeah.

So you wanted to make sure that they were it was clear which business you were um going to be entering.

Separate entrances.

Correct.

Yeah, understood.

Thank you.

Applicant.

Okay, no other questions.

Thank you, Scott, for your presentation.

Okay, thank you.

Um at this time, we'll open it up for public comment for anyone in support.

Are there any on the phone salonge or any in person that would like to make public comment in support of this item?

There's nobody that signed up in person.

If there's somebody online that would like to speak in favor of the item, please um press star six to unmute yourselves.

If there's anybody online that would like to speak in opposition of this item, please start heed star six to unmute yourselves.

There's nobody online.

Any further discussion among the board.

Um, I'll just make a comment that um I appreciate the questions about the um the code.

And I was kind of panning around downtown, right?

And the freestanding, I think, situation makes it a little bit different.

And I do think that that front yard also in my mind makes it a little bit different.

So I'm in support.

I think what you've done keeps a consistent facade, and I don't think that it's setting a precedent for numerous freestanding signs.

Um, you know, poor Richard's next door has like four different signs, but they're all attached, um, right?

So the wayfinding is there if I want to go to the cafe or the bookstore.

So if I want to go to Sushi Roller Latin social.

Um, so I I'm in favor of this and be happy to make a motion, but thanks for the presentation.

Yeah, and I think I was thinking the same thing about precedent, and there's the food social on Tahans South that's got multiple vendors.

Uh no freestanding sign that I know of.

I would hate to see six or eight freestanding signs, but they do share an entrance, which is why I asked that.

So I understand the functional use here, which is why I'm happy to support the item as well.

Uh yeah, Ryan, did you have a comment?

Yeah, uh Ryan T forto, just on that note.

I I we don't have a lot of freestanding signs within the downtown form-based zone.

There are a few, and in fact, I think we did do a sign warrant five years ago or something on Cimarron and Cascade for the convention and visitors bureau for an electronic message center's freestanding sign.

Most of the freestanding signs, uh, let me rephrase.

When we see freestanding signs downtown for a multi-tenant building, it usually is one freestanding sign with multiple um panels for each business.

But I believe the board and the applicant already discussed how that really doesn't make a lot of sense for the existing uh signage that they have at this property.

Um, so I just wanted to kind of add that context as far as the downtown form-based zone as a whole and how freestanding signs are relatively rare because buildings are usually pushed right up uh to the front facade, and we see our our commercial signage typically as wall signs and window signs downtown.

I also just think that it's really incorporated into a physical structure, you know, something that's part of the functionality of the building that also would prevent it being a precedent for standalone signs anywhere else because you just don't see a lot of this integration, you know, of exterior elements.

It's not kind of a free floating sign.

So I would support it as well.

Okay, well, a couple uh comments in support.

Do we have a formal motion?

I can make a motion.

I will make a motion to approve the warrant for Latin Social based upon the findings that the application meets the approval criteria as set forth in form-based code section 5.4.

Do you mind reading the item?

What?

Isn't that what I have?

8A F Z letters.

I'd like to make a motion to approve item 8A, FBZN 25-0005, Latin Social FBZ sign warrant to approve the warrant for Latin Social based upon the finding that the application meets the approval criteria as set forth in form-based code section 5.4.

Thank you, Nandine.

Bobby Mikalis, uh, I'll second the motion.

Thanks, Sam.

You you uh you got it.

Boardman, sorry, board member Luciano, how do you vote?

Aye.

Thank you.

Board member Nolette.

Can you type in the chat how do you vote?

We have an aye for board member Norlet.

The motion passes unanimously.

Okay.

Um there is a process for an appeal of this item and the appeal instructions in accordance with the requirements of section 75415 of the city unified development code.

An affected party may appeal to the city council any action of a downtown review board in relation to the zoning code where the action was adverse to that party.

The notice of appeal on the 176 dollar fee shall be filed with the city clerk no later than 10 days after the action from which the appeal is taken, which is Friday, September 12th, 2025.

The appeal letter should address specific zoning code requirements that were not adequately addressed by the downtown review board.

City council may elect to limit discussion at the appeal hearing to the specific matters set forth in the appeal letter.

And Solange, do we need to read the item into record?

Are we good on that?

All good.

Okay.

Um I think all of our presentations and updates have been pushed towards next month, which sounds like an action packed meeting in October.

So nothing there.

And at this time, unless there's anything further from staff, we can.