Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-10-03 Minutes• MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SIGN APPEALS A meeting of the Fayetteville Board of Sign Appeals was held on Monday, October 3, 1988 at 3:45 p.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: Don Mills, Dennis Becker, Deane Davenport and Robert Waldren MEMBERS ABSENT: Gerald Boyd and Larry Tompkins OTHERS PRESENT: Richard Wilson, Barry Herzog, Mark Brewer and Elaine Cattaneo MINUTES • The minutes of the August 1, 1988 meeting were approved as distributed. APPEAL SA 88-11 - FAYE9T'EVILLE DIAGNOSTIC CLINIC BARRY BERZOG - 9 WEST TOWNSHIP The first item on the agenda was an appeal for a variance to the Sign Ordinance Article 17, Section 17B-3 & 9 submitted by Barry Herzog for the Fayetteville Diagnostic Clinic. The request was to be allowed to leave the building sign in its current location. Barry Herzog stated that they are requesting a variance on the sign. He noted that the first thing they are in violation of is not paying the $10.00 plus the square footage fee and he will pay that today. He advised that Nancy Couch was the person who designed the sign and she didn't get the permit. The rest of it has to do with the actual location of the sign and they would like to keep it where it is because they feel that if they move it back any farther, the sign would not be visible or be of any purpose to them He clarified that originally they thought they had it in compliance with what the ordinance stated. Mr. Herzog stated that Nancy Couch put up the sign and she had a meeting with the City staff prior to this and thought they were setback properly. He noted that the right-of-way has been set back even farther than what they originally knew LIO • Board of Sign Appeals October 3, 1988 Page 2 the building would be. He commented that they know that at some point Township will be widened, but they will probably be out of that building within 2 years. Chairman Mills asked how far the sign is from the right-of-way. Mr. Herzog answered, 25'. Richard Wilson advised that the sign is only 5' from the right- of-way. He noted that the right-of-way at that point is 30' wide from the center line to their property line and there is 35' from the center line to the sign. He noted that the total right-of-way there is 70', but the paved part of the right-of-way is roughly about 30' wide. Mr. Herzog stated that they measured 46' from the center line to the sign. Robert Waldren stated that the only problem that he has with granting this is that they made the Montessori School down the street move their sign back. He noted that he understands that if it is moved back it will not be very visable coming from the East. Mr. Davenport stated that it is not up to the Board of Sign Appeals, however, to make sure a sign is visable. Chairman Mills stated that it is the responsibility of the sign people to know where the sign should be. She noted that there is possibly room at the sides of the yard to move it wherever they need to move it to be. legal.. The public hearing was closed and discussion took place among the Board members. Mr. Davenport stated that if they go by the sign philosophy that has been developing, unless there is a hardship or a mistake that the City has made, they have been being very tough. Mr. Waldren noted that he doesn't see the hardship here, although he does understand what the problem is. He stated that if need be the sign can be put on the front of the building and probably would be just as visible there as it is now. Dennis Becker stated that when Edmondston-Pruitt had that building, it was on the historic register. He asked if it still was. Mr. Herzog answered, yes. Mr. Becker asked if they can put a sign on the front of that building if it is on the historic register. Mark Brewer answered no because the building can not be altered. Mr. Becker stated that he thinks there is a logical problem here because if the sign is put back to conform it may not be visible. He noted that they could enforce the letter of the law and they could put the sign back where they can't see it. He stated that for now he would be in favor of leaving the sign where it is, then when the road is widened there, it could be moved. Mr. Davenport asked if they could put the condition on it that when the use of that building changes, the sign will have to be changed. Chairman Mills answered, yes, they could do that. She noted that her concern is with the person doing the sign, a person who is doing this for a living and does not measure correctly or even get a permit is being very reckless. She commented L5 • Board of Sign Appeals October 3, 1988 Page 3 that this penalizes the customers that she has, but at the same time a professional sign person should know to get a sign permit. Mr. Davenport asked how they could explore the fact whether they can put a sign on the building or not. Chairman Mills stated that the thing she had wondered about is if there was room on the sides of the building to put it back. Mr. Herzog stated that they have a parking lot on the east side and on the west it wouldn't be visible. Mark Brewer of Realty Concepts, Inc. stated that Honeywell on Washington Street is the president of the National Historical Society in the Washington County area and they have given him a list of what can and can't be done. He advised that they can't have anymore than their address on the front of a building that is on the historic register. MOTION Becker moved to grant the variance after the sign permit fee has been paid with a condition that the sign location goes with the existing use, Dr. Martin. The motion was seconded by Waldren. The motion failed 2-2-0 with Davenport and Mills voting no. APPEAL SA 88-12 - REALTY CONCEPTS NARK BREWER - 524 N COLLEGE The second item on the agenda was an appeal for a variance to the Sign Ordinance Article 17, Section 17B-9 submitted by Mark Brewer of Realty Concepts, Inc. located at 524 North College. Mark Brewer stated that they are two doors north of Kentucky Fried Chicken and Smith Two -Way Radio is directly to their south with two large mesh net satellite systems in front of it. He advised that these satellite systems hide their sign at Realty Concepts. Also, there is one large tree on their land and two on Smith's land that make it less visible, however, Smith's have already given him permission to cut the trees down. He noted that there is no turning lane on that area of North College and people that are looking for their business have trouble locating it because the building is back about 20' behind Smith's. To the North, there is a pink home that protrudes out in front of them also which makes their building tucked back and hidden. He advised that the sign is not visible at all from one direction because of the satellite dishes and the trees. Therefore, what he is proposing to do is move the sign to where it is exactly in line with the flag pole that Kentucky Fried Chicken has in front of their building which would require moving their sign roughly around 18' forward. This would put their sign approximately 25' to 28' from the road when measuring from the curb. Chairman Mills asked Richard Wilson, the Sign Inspector if the curb was the right-of-way along there. Mr. Wilson answered that the back of the sidewalk 4io • Board of Sign Appeals October 3, 1988 Page 4 would be the right-of-way. Deane Davenport asked how big the sign is that they want to move. Mr. Brewer answered that it is about 4' x 6'. Mr. Brewer noted that there is an L shaped pole there that was an existing sign, earlier. He stated that he had talked to Smith's about moving his dishes on top of the building, but he uses them in their satellite and cable systems which is their livelihood. Chairman Mills stated that she had thought they were probably for display. Chairman Mills asked if he needed the permanent sign moved to where the temporary sign is now. Mr. Brewer answered, yes, and that would be directly in line with the flag pole at Kentucky Fried Chicken which would be visible. He noted that it would be approximately 15' behind the sidewalk. Robert Waldren asked Richard Wilson how far that the sign needs to be back. Mr. Wilson answered, 22'. Deane Davenport asked how far back the pole is that is there now. Mr. Wilson stated that he would have to check the permit on that. Robert Waldren advised that the sign can be seen. •Dennis Becker noted that traffic might get rear-ended looking for it. He advised that this area seems to be still in the transition period from residential to commercial. Therefore, it is almost a hidden business to start with in that location. Mr. Brewer asked if Kentucky Fried Chicken could have the flag pole where it is. Mr. Wilson answered that flag poles don't have to meet the setbacks; they are exempt. Mr. Brewer advised that the sign is impossible to see traveling south to north and it is probably 40% visible going from north to south. Chairman Mills asked if he is planning to cut the trees. Mr. Brewer answered that he would be cutting the one in the front and the one closer to the sign and the third tree would be pruned up higher if he couldn't get this variance so that the sign would be visible. He noted that he wanted to save the trees so that they could be part of his landscaping. Chairman Mills asked what size his sign would need to be if he moved it where he wants it. Mr. Wilson answered that it would need to be 10 square feet if it is only 15' from the right-of-way. He noted that 15' is the minimum distance they can be from the right-of-way. The public hearing was closed and discussion took place among the Board members. Chairman Mills noted that where the sign is may not be what he wants, but he could cut the tree by the sign to make it more visible and it would still be t47 • • Board of Sign Appeals October 3, 1988 Page 5 legal. Robert Waldren stated that he hated to see them cut the tree, but if he could move it out from behind that tree and save the tree, he would go along with that. Chairman Mills asked if there is the possibility of working with the sign to keep it legal and yet moving it any closer. MOTION Davenport moved to table this until the next meeting so that they can go look at this again because they need exact measurements on where sign is now, seconded by Becker. Deane Davenport noted that they don't know exactly where it is now, how big the sign is, how high the sign is or what he can do with it. Mr. Brewer advised that if they can use the existing sign, it would be cost- saving for them. The motion to table passed 4-0-0. Mr. Davenport stated that along with that he would like to direct Richard Wilson to measure this thing and put flags up or something so they can see where the measurements are. Chairman Mills stated that they would all like to look at it again. She asked when someone fills out an appeal, who is responsible for getting measurements to the Board of Sign Appeals. Mr. Wilson answered that the person making the appeal is responsible for submitting the measurements as to where they want the sign and how far back from the right-of-way it is, etc. They need to determine where the right-of-way is. Chairman Mills asked Mr. Brewer if they told him to get the measurements. He answered, no. Deane Davenport asked who he had talked to when he came in. Mr. Brewer answered that when he first came in he was given a form at the front desk that he filled out and it was the wrong form. Then he went into the office on the other side of the desk to the right hand side and was given a new form. Mr. Wilson stated that the form had been changed recently. He noted that the Inspection Department used to have a form that they did all the work with, but then the Planning Department had to include this in their form when this Board was designated the Board of Sign Appeals. He advised that some of the old forms were still being used because some applicants had picked up several at once and would just mail them back in. Chairman Mills advised that they have been trying to get the Board of Sign Appeals agenda worked out for six months. She noted that they have had a • • Board of Sign Appeals October 3, 1988 Page 6 different format for every meeting and that she will talk to John Merrell and get this worked out. Robert Waldren asked Mr. Wilson if he would give them each a copy of his regulations for the next meeting. Deane Davenport asked Mr. Wilson to please mark the 15' and the 22' measurements back from the right-of-way for them to go by when he goes out there to measure this. There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 5:07 p.m. 4q