HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-02-20 Minutes•
MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SIGN APPEALS
A meeting of the City of Fayetteville Board of Sign Appeals was held on Monday,
February 20, 1989 at 3:45 p.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building,
113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Don Mills, Robert Davis, Larry Tompkins, Dee Wright and
Dennis Becker
MEMBERS ABSENT: Robert Waldren and Gerald Boyd
OTHERS PRESENT: Freemen Wood, Jerry Allred, Carl Grimes and Elaine Cattaneo
MINUTES
The minutes of the regular meeting of December 19, 1988 were approved as
distributed.
SIGN APPEAL NO SA89-1 - BOYD HARRIS
Chairman Mills advised that SA89-1 submitted by Boyd Harris is being postponed
until the next meeting because Mr. Harris was unable to attend.
• SIGN APPEAL NO. SA88-16
GREER PLAZA - 70 N COLLEGE
•
The only item of consideration was a request for a Sign Appeal No. SA88-16
submitted by Greer Plaza Property Owner's Association and represented by Jerry
Allred and Carl Grimes. Property is located at 70 North College and zoned C-3,
Central Commercial. Request was for a variance to the Sign Ordinance (Article
17B, Section 17 B-9).
Jerry Allred stated that they have fought for two years since they redid the
building, not to put any signs on the building whatsoever. However, it is now
affecting the rentability of their office spaces. What they are requesting is a
sign directory so that the thirteen tenants that make up Greer Plaza can have
some signage out front for location. They are losing tenants because of this
situation. They want a small directory in front of the building and they would
be willing to offer a Bill of Assurance that there will be no wall signs mounted
on the building now or in the future on the sides as well as the front of the
building. Due to the location of the building, there is no way to move a sign
back. The sign they are asking for would be illuminated for the evening. There
is no retail allowed so it is all professional offices.
Mr. Becker asked what they thought about the staff's recommendation in the staff
report stating that the Board may wish to postpone their decision in order to
evaluate the impact of the potential demolition of the old theater building. Mr.
Allred stated that it is his understanding that there are no negotiations going
•
•
Board of Sign Appeals
February 20, 1989
Page 2
on with the County for that particular property so that building may still be
there five or six years from now. Even if it were torn down, it would not
enhance the visibility of their building because of the way it is located.
Ms. Wright asked if they could use a different size sign. Mr. Allred stated that
they would make it as small as they could where you could still see it. They
want to stay away from the "Auto Zone" type signage even though they could go to
that type of signage if they wanted. That would defeat the many, many thousands
of dollars they have spent designing the front of that building.
Mr. Davis stated that the "Greer" name is so well known and that is a good
address itself in that location. Mr. Allred stated that there problem is that
all those small shops enter on that common hallway and can't be seen from
outside. They are losing four of their tenants right now; they are saying they
need more visibility for their businesses.
Mr. Grimes stated that the design of their sign would match the architecture of
the windows on the building.
Mr. Tompkins stated that no matter what you do, you can't see this sign until you
get in the center and use the outside lane coming from the South although it was
not bad coming from the North. Mr. Allred stated that if it were a wall sign,
it would not be seen at all. Mr. Tompkins added that with the speed of traffic
on College Avenue, it is a traffic hazard when they are looking for signs. The
type of sign they are wanting could create a problem when people are trying to
read the individual names rather than just "70 N College".
Mr. Becker stated that he thinks they are in trouble anyway they go. The wall
sign could cause a traffic hazard and a vertical sign could cause the same
problem with people trying to read the names. He suggested that they go with
"Greer Plaza, 70 N. College". There is a basic safety problem with that
location.
Mr. Grimes stated that their tenants are really pushing them hard on this. They
wanted to maintain the integrity and the attractiveness of the building, but they
have financial security at stake here.
Ms. Wright asked if there would be some sort of consolation to the tenants that
if they had a sign like this with the names small enough that it wouldn't be able
to be read from the road but they would be appeasing the tenants. It wouldn't
create a hazard if from the road they couldn't read it anyway, but they would be
forced to decrease the sign size. Chairman Mills stated that she thinks it goes
back to the original intent of the Sign Ordinance.
Mr. Allred stated that they financially can not resist doing something. If they
don't offer their tenants the signage, they are going to lose their tenants which
will cause financial hardship. Chairman Mills stated that financial hardship is
not a hardship as far as this Board is concerned.
Mr. Becker suggested that rather than design it as a sign, they design it as a
�1
•
Board of Sign Appeals
February 20, 1989
Page 3
wall extension which would make it a piece of the wall. Mr. Allred stated that
they would probably still need a variance on the setback if they did that.
Mr. Wood stated that they do have the option of a projecting sign there, but
projecting signs are only allowed at 16 square feet. If they could make it a
part of the building, they wouldn't be stuck with the 16 feet because they would
have the wall sign requirements. They would have to meet the setbacks for the C-
3 zone. Mr. Grimes stated that as far as attaching it to that to the northwest
part of the building, he wouldn't see that as a problem.
Chairman Mills advised that they need to determine whether or not they want to
grant the sign appeal and then go from there.
The Public Hearing was closed and discussion took place among the Board members.
Mr. Tompkins stated that he has a concern with safety with this appeal. The
address "70 N. College" would be more appropriate. Mr. Davis and Mr. Becker
agreed.
NOTION
Mr. Becker moved to deny the variance, seconded by Tompkins. The motion passed
• 5-0-0.
OTHER BUSINESS
Chairman Mills introduced the new member, Dee Wright.
Chairman Mills stated that they would postpone their discussion about criteria
for sign appeal until John Merrell could be present and they are still planning
to have Ernie Jacks come in and discuss the intent of the Sign Ordinance.
ABERNATHY, BRYAN (SA90-12)
BABE RUTH BASEBALL LEAGUE (SA92-11).
BABE RUTH BASEBALL LEAGUE (SA92-1.1)
BASSETT, DAVID (SA90-10)
CAR MART (SA88-8)
DISCUSSION OF SIGN APPEAL ORDINANCES
DISCUSSION OF AMENDMENTS TO SIGN ORDINANCE
DISCUSSION REGARDING PROPOSED TREE ORDINANCE
DISCUSSION OF 2010 UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT PLAN - VERSION DI'.
EMMA'S RESTAURANT (SA90-14)
ENTRE' COMPUTER CENTER (SA88=6)
ENTRE' COMPUTER CENTER (SA88-6X..
EVELYN HILLS SHOPPING CENTER (SA90-5)
EYE CLINIC OF NORTHWEST ARKANSAS
FAYETTEVILLE DIAGNOSTIC CLINIC (SA88-11)
117
183.
179:
128` ,
175
44
GIBSON, ANDY (SA92-5) 162
GRAY, HARRY (SA92-1) 149 '
GREER PLAZA (SA88-16) 60
HARDEE'S FOOD SYSTEMS (SA88-5)
HARRIS, BOYD (SA89-1)
HARRIS, BOYD (SA89-1)
IBM CORP. (SA88-14)
63
60
IGA AT EVELYN HILLS (SA88-7) 33`
JACKSON, LEE (SA90-2)
KENTUCKY FRIED CHICKEN (SA88-4) _
KHODABANDEH, MOHSEN (BA92-22) :.176'''
LAZFNBY REAL ESTATE CO. (SA88-3)
LAZENBY, KEN (SA90-17)` 136`
MARKO, JOHN (SA91-2) ,140
MCDONALD'S (SA89-6) 70
MCDONALD'S CORP. (SA88-17)
MCDONALD'S (SA92-2) .152
85
MCILROY BANK (SA92-6,7,&8) 164
MCILROY BANK & TRUST (SA88-10) 41
MEASURING OF SIGNS 65
MONTESSORI SCHOOL (SA88-1) 10
MONTGOMERY WARD (SA90-1)a .77
NELMS CHEVROLET (SA89-5) 70
OZARK STAGEWORKS BANNER 129,
PEARSON, THOMAS JR. (BA92-15) 7 167.
PRESBYTERIAN & DISCIPLES CAMPUS CTR. (SA90-3) 87
RAZORBACK CLEANERS (SA90-7) 96,
RAZORBACK EXXON (SA90-8) 101
•
RAZORBACK EXXON (SA90-8) 98:
REALTY CONCEPTS (SA88-12) 46
REALTY CONCEPTS (SA88-12) 50
REMAX REALTY (SA90-13) 124
RIGGS, RICK (SA91-5) 145
RISK, MARK (SA91-1) 138
• SANDERS, HOWARD (BA92-22) 178
SHEENAN, MIKE PROPOSAL TO AMEND SIGN ORDINANCE 79
STREET NUMBERS 67
•
T. J. KWIKIT (SA88-2) 12
T. J. KWIKIT (SA88-2) 16
TACO BELL (SA88-19) 58
THE BERRY PATCH (SA88-9) 38
UNITARIAN -UNIVERSALIST FELLOWSHIP (SA90-16) 132
W. C. FARM BUREAU (SA90-9) 105
W. C. FARM BUREAU (SA90-9) 120
W. C. FARM BUREAU (SA90-9) 127
WALKER, KIRBY (SA91-4) 142
WALMART STORES, INC. (SA92-4) 162
WALTON ARTS CENTER (SA92-3) 156
WALTON ARTS CENTER (SA90-6) 94
4
FAYETTEVI LLE
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE. ARKANSAS
•
DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE
Name
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT/SIGN APPEALS
ATTENDANCE
(November 6, 1989 - October 15, 1990)
Total Meetings #Absentees
Don Mills 20 1
Dennis Becker 20 1
Larry Tompkins 20 1
Gerald Boyd 20 3
Robert Davis 20 3
Robert Waldren 20 7
Dee Wright 20 3
•
cs'ic-cS
.
2/20✓ X
7/3
i
x
N
N
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\ \
\
\
•
\
\ d'<
\ \
\
x \
\ 7\
\
\
\
\
:_n\
0
I)
><
KKK
\x
s
�
1
1
C.7)
G
I
\
\•=:-\
\ \
x
)<
\
tl_B
V
-,--
u
L