HomeMy WebLinkAbout1972-02-14 MinutesMINUTES OF A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A joint meeting of the Planning Commission, Board of Directors, and Board of
Adjustment was held at 7:00 P.M., Monday, February 14, 1972, in the Directors
Room, City Administration Building, Fayetteville, Arkansas.
Planning Commission Members Present: Albert Witte, Dr. Walter Brown,
Donald Nickell, Helen Edmiston, Roy Clinton, Ernest Jacks, Claude
Hughes, John Maguire.
Board of Directors Present: Russell Purdy, Marion Orton, Ernest Lan-
caster, R.L. Utley, Dr. Joe McFerran, Loris Stanton,
Board of Adjustment Members Present: Connie Clack, Carl Yates, J.F.
Robinson, (Roy Clinton).
Members Present: Al Donaubauer (Planning Commission), Joe Fred Starr
(Board of Directors), and Suzanne Lighton (Board of Adjustment)
Others Present: David Malone, Pete Young, Wesley Howe, T.C. Carlson,
Jr., Don Offenbacker, James Freeman.
The purpose vof this joint meeting was to continue the review of the
proposed sign regulations.
Roy Clinton, Chairman of the Planning Commission, presided.
The discussion began on page 7 with "16.4 Non -Conforming Signs."
The group felt "lawful lifetime ofa place of business" should be
clarified or better defi.aed..' M&ny1elt-this should be'as long as
the business remained the same -whether it wad under the same owner-
ship or not. It was suggested that 16.4 (a) be changed to read
but such on-site, non -conforming sign may be repaired or
altered to decrease its sign area or its non -conformity." David
Malone suggested changing language in ordinance to make it clear
the destruction of 50% of replacement cost applied to signs also,
In discussing 16.4(b), E. Jacks and David Malone said this ordin-
ance may make some signs non -conforming that are not now noncon-
forming. David Malone thought a section should be put in to pro
vide that signs that are now legal under ordinance ;747, but made
non-conformiing,by the cproposed ordinance, would be continued for
the same 3 year abatement period as signs made non -conforming by
Ordinance 1747.
The group discussed the size of building construction signs per-
mitted in R districts and left at 8 sq. ft. 16.5 (b). They also
discussed real estate signs, but made no changes (16.5 (c).
John Maguire felt signs painted on the surface of buildings should
be prohibited in the City of Fayetteville because painted signs '
have a tendency to deteriorate rapidly. Also, people move off and
leave them. Albert Witte explained the theory of the Sign Committee.
Also, it was pointed out that painted signs could be painted out.
David Malone thought 16.5(8) ought to be reworded to read clearer.
103
JOINT SIGN
STUDY
2 -2
Mr. Malone was requested>to word definitions to relate!✓signs prim-
arily to business in on-site signs. He suggested that if it was
intended to have painted signs covered, or painted out, the word
"obliterated" should be added to 16.6.(a) with some other rewording.
16,6(e) -and 16.6(g) were to be reworded by changing "maintain" to
"continue in operation". A vote was requested on whether to pro-
hibit blinking, etc. sign in 16.6 (e) and 16.6 (g) to continue in
use '�jordty voted, "Aye" Stanton abstained. It was quest-
ioned whether this included revolving signs. 16.6 (f) was deleted
as it is covered in the penal code. 16.6 (h) prohibit off-site signs
along 71 By-pass within 660 ft. of By-pass ROW, etc. Mr. Malone -
wanted to reserve the right to question the legality of this section.
16.6 (1) David Malone to change wording to make portable, etc. signs
unlawful and to have them removed if they are in existence.
16.8, free standing signs, was discussed, Mr. Clinton and Mr. Jacks
favored a clause for high-speed signs. It was suggested the 30 ft.
height be figured from the level of the By-pass along the By-pass,
Chairman Clinton requested the Sign`Committee to reconvene to con-
sider both bulk and area requirements for free standing signs on
controlled access highways. Since some members of the original
committee are no longer on the Planning Commission, Albert Witte
suggested a member of the Board of Directors serve. Mr. Lancaster
requested no Board Member serve. Carl Yates twas asked to serve.
Loris Stanton felt strongly that 50 ft. setback from street RCW was
too much in the C Districts. Mr. Clinton thought the side setback
situation needs to be studied. No agreement could be reached on
setback from street ROW.
The next meeting will start with the bottom of Page 14.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 P.M.
104