Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1970-09-01 MinutesThe Fayetteville Planning Commission met at 4:30 P. M., Tuesday, September 1, 1970, in the Directors Room of the City Administration Building, Fayetteville, Arkansas. Members Present: Roy Clinton, Helen Edmiston, Dr. Walter Brown, Ernest Jacks, Al Donaubauer, Dr. James Mashburn, Clerk McClinton. Others Present: Wesley Have, Larry Wood, Harold Lieberenz, Matthew Bucksbaum, Mr. Westbrook,: Bass Trumbo, Ronald Self, Ken Boyer, John Lisle, Lynn Wade, Jim Tidwell, Jim Brock, Georgia Burge, Mrs. Laird Archer, Mrs. Robinn Anderson, B. A. Shamblin, Tam Campbell, Susan & Fred Kleihauer. McClintonChairman Clark :. Al Donaubauer Mr. Donaubauer stated that Item 5 on the agenda, the rezoning petition of Humble Oil & Refining Company for property located on the East side HUMBLE OIL & of Highway 71 North and North of Stearns Street from O-1, Open Land REFINING COMPANY District, to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District, tabled July 7, 1970 Highway 71 North for further study would not be considered today. Mr. Atkinson, the attorney, and Mr. Sullivan, realtor, had both requested a delay until September 15, Item 1 on the agenda was the Board of Directors Resolution 46-70 BOARD OF DIRECTORS referring the problem of signs and billboards back to the Planning Resolution 46-70 Commission for further study. Lynn Wade, Attorney, and several Signs & Billboards representatives of Donrey Outdoor Advertising (Mr. Tidwell, Mr. Brock, Mr. Snow) were present. Mr. Wade argued the zoning ordinance makes Donrey illegal and gives them one year to cease. They have 86 bill- boards. It would cost $300.00 per billboard to remove them. At the time of their erection they complied with ordinances in effect and secured the proper permits. Donrey has 32 leases with 24 land owners. Their clients contain a number of national users and approximately 130 local users. Donrey has two full time employees presiding in Fayetteville. Donrey contributes several thousand dollars annually to activities in this area. purposeMr. Wade stated the to proniote the reasonable, orderly, and effective display by setting standards to assist the advertising industry, He stated .: Donrey maintains .: structures :.. faces of their signs. correlationhe quoted reports showing no apparent between automobile Donreyaccidents and outdoor advertising, Under the terms of the ordinance every sign Donreya hardship existed to attribute onewthird of their revenues to outdoor advertising, Non� conforming on�premise business signs may be retained and maintained as norimconforming uses. He charged this is an arbitrary distinction. 9-1-70 ,,2111, Dr. Mashburn and Mr. McClinton arrived during Mr. Wade's talk. Mr. Wade showed slides of Donrey's billboards and other signs. He stated Congress has said a company must receive just compensation when property is taken from them. He protested outdoor advertising being prohibited in the C-12 C-3, and A-1 Districts. He argued the setbacks in other districts (C-2, I-1, and I-2) are too restrictive. He asked that in established areas of town, setbacks for signs be adjusted to conform with existing building locations. He stated the 100 foot setback in I-2 would make a sign difficult to read and may result in traffic accidents. .: ... ,� .• ..: 1..•C n .•Ile:. •.. .. : . *Was a No one was present to discuss a proposed Gulf Oil Comparq sign. Sham . /% more of his customers advertising such as Donrey, He credited the newspapers with a very small result. He said... size for cam:rcial and limitsindustrial sales is 61X41�the ordinance au rhose persons desiring to have the regulations unchanged were invited to speak: i Q940 • nm uwu : • • - •.a a .: .nm cr . • _ On Highway 62 there were 3 Liquor signs., 5 national concerns,, (3 not 1 • politicale: • • 2 smaller : • - • . signsthe directions as to where to go. In order to improve looks of Fayetteville,, she feels we must start doing some of the artificial thingsappearance, r. imposesMrs. Isaird Archer spoke next. The ordinance doesn't eliminate billboards but .,. . As to hardship,, these regulations apply to all businesses &like. Signs can proliferate to the point where they defeat their purpose. On _ personal side.. ownsruralalonglarge stretch 71 By�pass, She discussed this with the Planning Commission when annexation came up. They said they wanted promisedW another Highway 71. The ordinance provides this .. She is tired of apologizing to out�of�town visitors for Fayetteville, She thought that • O. CL does not have all the dire results they say it has, .. Mrs. Georgia Burge of the Fayetteville Council of Garden Clubs suggested perhaps all non�conforming signs should have to conform. M She :. tried to read the signs on Highway 71 the week before while • riding with her husband who was driving at a normal rate of speed; • and had been unable to .. so. She suggested a consumer poll,* she does not .• products because they are ., billboards, As far as compensation, communitypower of the legislature to determin that the , beautiful. discussion.At this time the Planning Commission rs themselves held a billboards not conforming in those areas where it is pretty well developed and buildings are also non�conforming, that setbacks in that area might conformbe permitted to ClintonRoy said the purpose of the setback requirements as noted in the cc=ittee report was that billboards meet setback requirements in the zone in which they are permitted, The ordinance has not differentiated between signs as a structure and buildings as a structure, Also, he felt the City Attorney should be consulted about the possible 10% reduction in funds and whether compensation would have to be made to the owners of the structures, Mr. Donaubauer stated that any change bears legal implications and any drastic change suggested bears consequences. He said he was sure ever7one was aware of Donrey's commmnity service aspects advertising,in VMr. McClinton asked why Donrey had not appeared before the Planning Commission. . a Mr. Wade said apparently Donrey did not realize they W in such a way. Mr. Wade noted there is nothing in the ordinance about V) spacing of signs. Mr. Clinton said he did not know and primary highways was to have been dealt with* Dr. Brown discussed the requirements for signs in the various districts :3 as listed .. Page 62 of zoning 0 Lynn Wade presented a sheaf of letters .: users of outdoor advertising .. in behalf, 9-1-70 -4- John Lisle, Attorney representing Boyer Sign Company and D�Sign Company; said the problems of .. photographspassed around Ordinancebe erected under Planningproblems his clients had encountered. Some members of the Commission buildings not over 20 or 25 feet widep some adjoining each other. Paragraph (4). Page 62 states signs shall not exceed the height of the building or / feet, whichever is lower, What are we going to here,do with people with standard nationwide signs designed by out of towners and brought in tole RAI. 6WOUR10411 . Ronald Self said he recently opened the a1.School Avenue, The sign he erected is in violation of the r due to its size, He doubted any comply,. has never problemrun into this ClintonRoy said .. r been given to the at TTA of .. regulations in Ordinance be redone --on one hand people doing business in Fayetteville,* .. the other hand City beautification. He doubted the intent was that a building 20 feet wide could not have a sign. In some situations, there is no way to meet some of these requirements. Dr. Mashburn signs,agreed insufficient study had been given to Bass Trmbo was present in service stations in C�2. Current sign regulations are a little too restrictive. He suggested the matter be referred to a sub� committee and let people interested attend and have a say�so, I 1 ..: : , .iiii,i Z . North.Item 8 on the agenda was discussed next since there were some GENERAL MANAGEMENT CORP gentlemen present from Des Moines, Iowa on this matter, Matthew Planned Developme Bucksbaum, President of General Management presented a Planned Highway 71 North Development Plan for a shopping complex to be located on the West aide of Highway 71 • :. was discussed relative to Arkansas Highway Department plans for wi General Management - been workingDepartment. access onto Highway 71. Mr. Lieberenz said the Plat Review is Committee had studied the plans. The question had been raised of a road coming in and creating a traffic problem going onto the I 9-1-70 -5- Highway. The City Engineer has requested they present off-site drainage plans. Since that meeting Mr. Wood has checked against Major Street Plan which shows a projected street extension of Zion Road to the West. He suggested General Management be asked to dedicate their southern boulevard as a collector width street. The necessity of changing the Major Street Plan if this were done was discussed. Mr. Howe commented it is not necessary that collectors on each side of a highway intersect- it might even be best if they do not. It is necessary to have a collector street to the West in this vicinity. The impossibility of connecting the General Management service road to Nelson Funeral Home Ia service road was discussed. Mr. Bucksbaum reminded the Planning Commission that General Management also cons property to the West of this development site. He questioned whether they might want a collector road to the North or South. Mr. Wood remarked that when collectors are tied together at intersections, they have a tendency to become major streets at collector standards. Traffic lights were discussed with no decisions reached. Roy Clinton left the meeting at 6:30 P.M. It was noted the access road would be dedicated to the City and and the collector street would require paving width of 40 feet. Mr. Bucksbaum said he thought the through street would be to General Management's advantage. movedDr. Mashburn the Planned Development modificationbe approved as presented subject to on collector road. Edmiston seconded. It was approved unanimously, Donaubauer apologi2ed to other persons having items .. the agenda for the delay. They were invited to come back the next day Dordinance was under study, a suggestion was made that the City Fathers should pass a separate ordinance dealing with signs* The meeting adjourned at 7:00 P.M. until 3:30 P.M., September 2.