HomeMy WebLinkAbout1971-11-16 MinutesRoy Clinton presided. At 4:15 P.M. the fifth member of the Planning
Commission necessary to constitute a quorum was not present. Mr. Clinton
announced that the appeal by Joe B. Cogdell to change a non -conforming
use and the proposed informal plat of L. C. Barnes Addition would not
be considered at this meeting since notaction could be taken without a
quorum. He requested they be placed on the agenda for December 7.
Mr. Clinton stated they would proceed directly to the joint study session
and discussion between the Planning Commission, Board of Directors, and STUDY OF SIG14
Board of Adjustment on the proposed revisions to sign regulations. He AMENDMENT WITH
requested that no one speak other than members of these bodies, Larry Wood, Board of
and Harold Lieberenz. Mr. Clinton requested Ernest Jacks, Chairman of Directors &:;
the Sign Committee, to explain what the Committee had endeavored to Board of
accomplish. Adjustment
(a Mr. Jacks stated the Committee had studied what had been done in other
cities and in other areas. The big problem seemed to be with ground
signs in areas where strips have formed, such as along Highway 71 North.
�+ The Com'mittee's recommendations were aimed at liberalizing wall signs
i and tightening controls on ground signs.
As a matter of information, Mr. Clinton said that during the past year
the Board of Adjustment has considered 70 appeals for variances. Twenty-
one of these were for signs.
W
The group entered into a page -by -page study of the proposals. Some minor
W corrections were suggested for clarification of wording aridto correct
OL spelling.
The question of whether a physical display of items or materials for sale
constituted a "sign" was discussed. No agreement was reached.
2 Under 16.1 (z) it was felt the words "or fainted on!' should be added and
D that the wording should also prohibit a sign projecting beyond the sides
" of the building.
Mrs. Orton felt wall signs should be limited in area to the same size as
ground signs. Mr. Jacks explained that the Committee's intention in
limiting ground siZns and liberalizing wall signs had been to encourage
the phasing out of ground signs. After a discussion, ;•;r. Purdy said he
was inclined to with the Comittee on taking limitations off ::•all signs.
Al Witte arrived at 4:45 P.M.
IF
e
MINUTES OF A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
�y
e
The Fayetteville
Planning Commission met at 4:00 P.M., Tuesday, November 16,
LI
1971, in the Directors Room, City Administration Building, Fayetteville,
L7
Arkansas,
Li
Members Present:
Dr. Walter Brown, Roy Clinton, Ernest Jacks, Helen
CL
Edmiston, Al Witte.(arrived late).
Members Absent:
Byron Boyd, L. M. McGoodwin, Dr. James Mashburn,
Al Donaubauer,
J
7r
Others Present:
Dr. Joe McFerran, Col. R. L. Utley, Marion Orton,
Russell Purdy, Loris Stanton, Suzanne Lighton,
Wesley Howe, Pete Young, Larry Wood, Harold Lieberenz,
and others.
Roy Clinton presided. At 4:15 P.M. the fifth member of the Planning
Commission necessary to constitute a quorum was not present. Mr. Clinton
announced that the appeal by Joe B. Cogdell to change a non -conforming
use and the proposed informal plat of L. C. Barnes Addition would not
be considered at this meeting since notaction could be taken without a
quorum. He requested they be placed on the agenda for December 7.
Mr. Clinton stated they would proceed directly to the joint study session
and discussion between the Planning Commission, Board of Directors, and STUDY OF SIG14
Board of Adjustment on the proposed revisions to sign regulations. He AMENDMENT WITH
requested that no one speak other than members of these bodies, Larry Wood, Board of
and Harold Lieberenz. Mr. Clinton requested Ernest Jacks, Chairman of Directors &:;
the Sign Committee, to explain what the Committee had endeavored to Board of
accomplish. Adjustment
(a Mr. Jacks stated the Committee had studied what had been done in other
cities and in other areas. The big problem seemed to be with ground
signs in areas where strips have formed, such as along Highway 71 North.
�+ The Com'mittee's recommendations were aimed at liberalizing wall signs
i and tightening controls on ground signs.
As a matter of information, Mr. Clinton said that during the past year
the Board of Adjustment has considered 70 appeals for variances. Twenty-
one of these were for signs.
W
The group entered into a page -by -page study of the proposals. Some minor
W corrections were suggested for clarification of wording aridto correct
OL spelling.
The question of whether a physical display of items or materials for sale
constituted a "sign" was discussed. No agreement was reached.
2 Under 16.1 (z) it was felt the words "or fainted on!' should be added and
D that the wording should also prohibit a sign projecting beyond the sides
" of the building.
Mrs. Orton felt wall signs should be limited in area to the same size as
ground signs. Mr. Jacks explained that the Committee's intention in
limiting ground siZns and liberalizing wall signs had been to encourage
the phasing out of ground signs. After a discussion, ;•;r. Purdy said he
was inclined to with the Comittee on taking limitations off ::•all signs.
Al Witte arrived at 4:45 P.M.
IF
11-16-71
.2.
The registration of existing signs (page 6 of the proposal) was discussed.
Mr: Stanton stated this would increase work load and filing space.
Mr. Lieberenz said it is necessary if the City hopes to phase out non-
conforming •signs ---this is the purpose of registration of existing signs,
to pinpoint their location.
'Mr. Stanton was not in agreement with phasing out every non -conforming
sign and with the 50 ft. setback proposed.
This was discussed at length. Mr. Clinton said a decision will have to
be made as to whether the City is going to phase out non -conforming signs.
The regulations for repairs and maintenance to non -conforming signs was
discussed. It was felt they should be able to repair them.
Mr. Purdy did not feel registration of signs was necessary, as he felt
the non-comforming ones would stand out.
The group decided to eliminate Section 16.2 (d) on Page 6 and to
eliminate Section 16.2 (b) (2) and (3) on Page 5.
Mr. Lieberenz asked the groups opinions on signs such as "Green Stamps"
signs, and Coca-Cola Signs. In the past he has permitted them to change
the lettering on the Coca-Cola signs which gives the name of the business
without a permit if the business changes. He asked if they considered
these on-site signs or off-site signs. It was felt they would be on-site
signs.
Many of the group felt the term "Lawful lifetime of a business" should
be clarified.
On Page 6, Section 16.3 (a) delete "Hereafter erected" and "in letters not
less than one inch in height, the date of erection or registration and
the permit or registration number." Change "have painted" to "show".
Add "the permit number" after the word "ground".
The group was still not in agreement on phasing out non -conforming
signs and how it should be accomplished if it is to be done.
Mr. Clinton stated they would resume the study on Page 6 next time.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:30 P.M. No date was set for the next
study session.
0