The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1990-07-16 Minutes• •: • MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SIGN APPEALS A meeting of the Fayetteville Board of Sign Appeals was held on Monday, July 16, 1990, at 3:45 p.m. in Room 111 of the City Administration Building, 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: Don Mills, Larry Tompkins, Dennis Becker, Robert Waldren, Gerald Boyd, MilimprO=DUMIEB and Dee Wright MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: MINUTES Robert Davis Becky Bryant, Elaine Cattaneo, Don Cobb and Bob Morris The minutes of the July 2, 1990 meeting were approved as distributed. APPEAL NO. SA90-8- VARIANCE FROM THE SIGN ORDINANCE RAZORBACK EXXON - SE CORNER OF FUTRALL DR & W 6TH ST The first item on the agenda was Appeal No. SA90-8 submitted by Don Cobb of D -Sign Company on behalf of Bob Morris for Razorback Exxon for property located on the southeast corner of Futrall Drive and West 6th Street (2333 West 6th Street) and zoned I-1, Light Industrial -Heavy Commercial. Request was for a variance from the Sign Ordinance, Article 17, Section 17B-9. Chairman Mills advised that this item was tabled at the last meeting to give the applicant an opportunity to obtain more information to clarify the appeal. MOTION Mr. Tompkins moved to remove this item from the table, seconded by Becker. The motion passed 5-0-0. Don Cobb stated that he has a proposal from the owners of the Exxon station. Their request is to be allowed to install a new legal conforming sign with the exception of the conflict of the high-rise sign and remove the existing small free-standing sign which is too close to the right-of-way. They further request that the high- rise sign be allowed to remain in its current location for eight years to allow them to realize the twenty-year life. At the end of this period, they will remove one of the signs to bring the location into strict compliance with the ordinance. Mr. Tompkins stated that he had asked for more information about the height of the existing high-rise sign. There was a question of whether it was measured from the grade of the expressway • • • Board of Sign Appeals July 16, 1990 Page 2 overpass. Mr. Cobb stated that, as he understands it, the height of a sign is measured from the crown of the highway when it is next to a controlled access road. Chairman Mills clarified that they are requesting to be allowed to put in a new free-standing sign, to leave the high-rise for eight more years, and remove the Exxon identification sign in the front of the canopy at the same time. Mr. Cobb agreed. In answer to a question from Mr. Tompkins, Mr. Cobb explained that they would be taking the price panel and the identification sign down. Mr. Boyd asked if the owner would reserve the option to take down the new sign or the high-rise sign at the end of the eight-year period. Mr. Cobb stated that their proposal doesn't specify, but to be in strict conformance, the high-rise sign would have to be removed. Mr. Cobb stated that they could specify that the high- rise sign would be removed. In answer to a question from Mr. Tompkins, Mr. Cobb stated that the best he can determine after checking the records with the staff is that the high-rise sign has been up for 12 years. Becky Bryant, Associate Planner, clarified that, according to her records, a 50' high-rise sign was permitted to be erected in 1972, which was eighteen years ago. The public hearing was closed and discussion took place among the Board members. Mr. Boyd stated that it seems like a reasonable proposal to him. Mrs. Wright stated that, according to the records they were provided from an earlier court case, the Supreme Court considered the validity of the seven-year amortization period for on-site signs. Therefore, eight years would be reasonable, since it is only one year more than the time period mentioned in the court case. Mr. Tompkins voiced his concern about the total number of signs on the site including those on the canopies because of the aesthetics aspect. He noted that he is interested in the elimination of the high-rise sign. Mr. Cobb stated that the ordinance provides for one free-standing sign and four building signs (one on each side of the building). The canopy is a structure itself so the signs on it are in compliance. Mr. Tompkins stated that he is interested in company policy as to the aesthetic aspect of the entire area. He advised that the sign ordinance should help present a good aesthetic appearance to the entry way of the City. • Board of Sign Appeals July 16, 1990 Page 3 MOTION Mrs. Wright moved to accept the applicant's proposal and allow the erection of another free-standing sign with the condition that the high-rise sign be removed after eight years, seconded by Boyd and followed by discussion. Chairman Mills clarified that the applicant's proposal is to remove the small sign in front when the new free-standing sign is erected, leaving them with two free-standing signs. Then, the high-rise sign will be removed at the end of the eight-year period. Mr. Tompkins stated that they could require that the high-rise sign be removed sooner than that. He was concerned about the eight-year time period. Mrs. Wright stated that, as it stands now, the existing high-rise sign could be left up forever. This proposal would get rid of the high-rise sign. AMENDMENT TO MOTION • Mrs. Wright amended her motion to state that the high-rise sign would have to be removed after seven years, seconded by Boyd. The motion passed 4-2-0 with Wright, Boyd, Becker & Waldren voting "yes" and Tompkins & Mills voting "no". • OTHER BUSINESS Item #1: Nominations for Chairman Chairman Mills advised that the chairman is appointed in August and is voted on in September each year. She asked for any nominations from the Board members. MOTION Mr. Waldren moved to nominate Don Mills for chairman, seconded by Wright. The motion passed unanimously. Item #2: Bylaws Chairman Mills stated that she and Becky Bryant, Associate Planner, had been reviewing the Board of Adjustment/Sign Appeals current bylaws. They have discovered that some things the Board has voted to do were never included in the new bylaws. She advised that Ms. Bryant has drafted some bylaws for the Historic District Commission and is willing to work on bringing the Board of Adjustment bylaws • • • Board of Sign Appeals July 16, 1990 Page 4 up-to-date. Mr. Tompkins stated that they should have separate bylaws for the Board of Sign Appeals. Ms. Bryant stated that some of the things they want to address include in what instances the chairman should vote and absenteeism of Board members. She requested that the Board members submit any input that they would like to have incorporated in the bylaws. She stated that she will submit a draft of the bylaws to them at the next meeting. Item #3: Overhead Projector Chairman Mills asked if the overhead projector could be utilized by the Board of Adjustment/Sign Appeals when reviewing site plans, etc. Ms. Bryant stated that she will check into using the overhead projector for that purpose. Item #4: Request that the Staff Look Into Elimination of the Industrial Spot Zoning Along a Highway Chairman Mills stated that Robert Davis had asked her to mention again his comments at the last meeting regarding review of industrial spot zoning along the Highway such as the Exxon station next to the Bypass. He would like the staff to review and eliminate these industrial zonings when the mapping is done for the new zoning for the City. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:45 p.m.