The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1990-04-16 Minutes• • • MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SIGN APPEALS A meeting of the Fayetteville Board of Sign Appeals was held on Monday, April 16, 1990, at 3:45 p.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: MINUTES: Don Mills, Larry Tompkins, Gerald Boyd, Robert Davis and Robert Waldren Dee Wright and Dennis Becker Becky Bryant The minutes of the Board of Sign Appeals meeting of April 2, 1990 were approved as distributed. APPEAL NO. SA90-3 - VARIANCE FROM THE SIGN ORDINANCE PRESBYTERIAN & DISCIPLES CAMPUS CTR - 902 W. MAPLE The only item was a variance request from the sign ordinance (Appeal No. SA90- 3) submitted by Presbyterian & Disciples Campus Center and represented by Dennis Kimmel for property located at 902 West Maple Street which is zoned R-3, High Density Residential. The request was for a variance from the..sign.ordinance: Article 17, Section 17B-9. Dennis Kimmel, who currently serves on the Board of the Presbyterian & Disciples Campus Center as a student volunteer, stated that he is currently working on his masters in Chemical Engineering at the University. He stated that the Campus Center was originally built in 1964. Then, the "Deep End" was opened in the late 1960's as a open air coffee house, but it ceased operation in the 1970's. The facility is now used by students, faculty and university employees for such things as Wednesday's Chapel. Other organizations use it primarily in the evening hours for Campus Alcoholic Anonymous meetings as well as various other student organizations. He advised that, in the early 1980's, the Presbyterian Church of the northern United States and the Presbyterian Church of the southern United States reunited. This made the sign on the building, which indicated two churches, no longer good information. Since then, the church has been working to put new signs on the building. He stated that they don't have any record of when the two existing signs were erected. The Board of Directors of the Church has directed him to bring the signs into compliance with the City ordinance. Also, they are seeking approval of the new signs. Mr. Kimmel stated that they would prefer to keep the sign on the north, because it gives a quick identification of the building. He noted that anyone, coming down the alley way, would not be able to see the building, until they were right upon it, because of the tree line and other buildings nearby. Also, from Storer Street, the building's identification isn't visible, until close to Maple Street. They also feel the sign should be allowed so that the patrons of the center will know which direction to go, since there is no identification of the buildings a • Board of Sign Appeals April 16, 1990 Page 2 • • from the parking lot. The sign they propose will be made from 100 year old redwood. It was noted in the application to be approximately 4' x 6'. However, since submitting the application, he has talked with the sign person who determined that the sign size will be closer to 5' high. A 4' x 5' sign gives a basic total size of 20 square feet. After subtracting the four corners from that (approximately 8 square feet), the total estimated sign area would be about 12 square feet. In answer to a question from Mr. Boyd, Mr. Kimmel stated that the "Deep End" facility does not currently operate as an open-air coffee house. It is used mainly for meetings. He noted that the sign does serve as a symbol for the Campus Alcoholics Anonymous. Becky Bryant, Associate Planner, noted that the "Deep End" sign could be considered a historical sign. In answer to a question from Mr. Tompkins, Mr. Kimmel stated that they are proposing a sign for the south end to be facing towards the campus. They are proposing two identical signs (one on the south face and one on the east face). The primary purpose of the one on the east would be for visibility from Maple Street. He added that the "Deep End" sign and the north sign would remain, giving them a total of four signs on the building. In answer to a question from Mr. Tompkins, Mr. Kimmel stated that there would be a light shining on the signs. Mr. Tompkins stated that there are a lot of trees and shrubs that may prevent the sign from being seen. He added that the character of the neighborhood is basically residential. He noted, also, that there are at least four regular activities going on at this facility. The alternative to this proposal would be an address sign. Mr. Kimmel stated that they are planning to put the address on the stone wall which extends to the sidewalk. Mr. Waldren stated that, as he understands it, the sign on the south end is o.k. Chairman Mills noted that they are allowed to have one sign on each wall. Mr. Waldren stated that the issue is two signs on the east wall and the nonconforming sign on the front. Mr. Kimmel stated that the fireplace splits the building into the north end of the building(where the "Deep End" sign is located) from the south end(where the proposed sign would be located.) In answer to a question from Chairman Mills, Mr. Kimmel stated that the "Deep End" sign is approximately 4.5' x 3'. Mr. Boyd stated that they could put up a four square foot informational sign. Becky Bryant stated that she wouldn't consider the "Deep End" sign as informational. The public hearing was closed and discussion took place among the members. 47 • Board of Sign Appeals April 16, 1990 Page 3 • • Mr. Waldren noted that he is inclined to go along with the staff's recommendation and permit the two signs on the east side with the removal of the non -conforming sign on the north. Chairman Mills stated that, in her opinion, the building is very visible, so they probably don't need that many signs. For identification purposes, it seems that one sign on each street would be adequate. Mr. Boyd stated that he doesn't feel this is the kind of activity that needs this much signage anyway. Mr. Tompkins stated that, in terms of sight distance, he doesn't think the sign will add anything to the identification. He stated that he doesn't see a problem with moving the first sign over to the corner instead of having so many signs. He stated that he is inclined to disagree with the proposal requested. Chairman Mills stated that most of the buildings on campus are identified with a small square sign. Mr. Boyd stated that the size of the sign is o.k.; the problem is that there would be two signs on one wall and an illegal sign on the north wall. In answer to a question from Chairman Mills, Ms. Bryant,_stated that the sign meets the square footage requirement. The issues are two -signs on the east side and the non-conforming/illegal sign on the north side. She added that they are requesting approval of the non-conforming/illegal sign as well as a variance for the other sign. Mr. Kimmel advised that he had been instructed by the minister that, if the City would allow a sign on the east and south sides, they would remove the sign on the north side. MOTION Mr. Waldren moved to permit the sign on the east side along with the "Deep End" sign subject to the removal of the non -conforming sign on the north side, seconded by Davis. The motion passed 3-2-0 with Waldren, Davis, Boyd voting "yes" and Tompkins & Mills voting "no". There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. �V\