LAWRENCE SIGN CODE BOARD OF APPEALS

MINUTES

APRIL 1, 2004 - COMMENCING AT 6:30 P.M. PRIOR TO THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING, CITY COMMISSION MEETING ROOM, FIRST FLOOR, CITY HALL, SIXTH AND MASSACHUSETTS STREET, LAWRENCE, KANSAS

_____________________________________________________________________

MEMBERS PRESENT:   Mr. Hannon, Mr. Goans, Mr. Santee, Mr. Hicks, Mr. Fizell, Mr. Herndon and new Board member Mr. Lane

 

STAFF PRESENT:  Mr. Guntert, Mr. Walthall and Ms. Saker

 

ITEM NO. 1:    MINUTES  

The following changes were requested to the minutes of the March 2004 meeting:

·         Five spacing errors were noted

 

Motioned by Mr. Hannon, seconded by Mr. Fizell to approve the minutes of the March 4, 2004 meeting.  Motion carried 6-0-1, with Mr. Lane in abstention.

 

ITEM NO. 2:    COMMUNICATIONS

·         There were no additional communications for the Board.

·         No Items were requested for deferral.

·         The Board welcomed new member Stephen Lane, Lawrence Architect.

 

Swearing in of witnesses

 

ITEM NO. 3:    KING PHARMACY & LMH WOUND HEALING CENTER; 1112 WEST 6^TH STREET

 

SV-02-03-04:  A request for a variance from the provisions of Chapter 5, Article 7 (Signs), of the Code of the City of Lawrence, Kansas, 2003.  The request is to allow a wall sign of 9.4 sq. ft. on the west elevation of the building; and an 18 sq. ft. sign on the south wall of the building just below the “Lawrence Medical Plaza” sign.  Section 5-738.3(B) of the Code allows one wall sign up to 10 sq. ft. of surface area per building.  Submitted by Michael Schmidt with Luminous Neon, Inc. for H & S Holdings, LLC, owner of record.

 

STAFF PRESENTATION

Mr. Walthall explained this was an unusual request, because the Sign code did not specifically address the O-1 (Office) zoning district.  The Board typically applied the restrictions of the next-closest zoning classification, RO-1 (Residential / Office), but with recognition that this may not be strictly appropriate.

 

There were several signs located on the subject property, most with variances granted from the RO-1 restrictions.  The applicant requested permission to enlarge and relocate an existing sign on the southern elevation to the western elevation, facing the parking lot (King Pharmacy).  The applicant also asked to replace the moved sign with another sign of different shape, also larger than the original sign, on the southern elevation (LMH Wound Healing Center).

 

Mr. Walthall showed examples of the size, shape, location and appearance of each proposed sign, stating it appeared that previous review boards had been lenient in applying the RO-1 regulations to this site.

 

It was established that the King Pharmacy sign was allowed to face the parking area.  It was not necessarily required to face the public right-of-way per the RO-1 restrictions.  However, a variance was still needed because of the total wall sign area.  The presence of two ground signs resulted in an allowable wall sign of 2 square feet maximum in area.  Without the ground signs, the wall area signage would be allowed with a 10 square foot maximum.

 

Staff was asked if the regulations for commercial zoning had been considered for this property.  Mr. Walthall said C-5 zoning would allow the location, but would still require a variance for a third wall sign.

 

The Board discussed the uses the proposed signs would face and concern was expressed that existing King Pharmacy customers would think the business had closed when the old sign was removed (moved).

 

It was summarized that many variances had been approved in the past for the subject property and there were no regulations specifically addressing this zoning district.  Staff recommended approval of both variances as presented.

 

APPLICANT PRESENTATION

Scott Miller, Director of the LMH Would Healing Center, explained the intent of the new sign on the southern elevation was to direct customers.  After a year of business, the Center’s patients were having difficulty locating them because the Center was not part of the hospital proper.  Brochures and pamphlets explained their satellite location, but this was still a common problem.

 

The Center had discussed signage options with the owner of King Pharmacy, and that owner had been amenable to moving his existing sign to a location closer to his own entrance, vacating the area now proposed for the Center’s sign.

 

It was discussed that the King Pharmacy sign was proposed for enlargement as well as relocation.  The Board asked if this was because of visibility problems.  Mr. Miller replied the objective for the King Pharmacy sign was to remove it from the “clutter” of signs on the south wall and put it closer to the business’ entrance.

 

John Oehlert, building manager, explained most of the pharmacy’s customers came to this location for specific, unusual medications.  The larger sign was simply to “stand out” and let customers know the business was still in the building.  Mr. Oehlert said there was nothing special about the proposed sign sizes.  The requested measurements were simply what had been designed by the sign company.

 

The Board discussed with Mr. Oehlert how the proposed signs would assist customers in finding the Center, noting the Lawrence Medical Plaza should be an obvious location to most local residents.  It was pointed out that the Center served many patients from out of town who were not familiar with the Plaza’s separate location from the hospital.

 

Tammy Moody, Luminous Neon, explained the 10” lettering had been chosen for readability from the street and uniformity throughout the building’s signage.  She suggested these signs should be considered directional in nature. 

 

It was again noted that the Center’s sign would be replacing one already allowed by a previous variance.

 

PUBLIC COMMENT

No member of the public spoke on this Item.

 

BOARD DISCUSSION

It was commented that this was perhaps the simplest way to deal with permitting signage for both uses, although the Board might have preferred to have only one sign.  The Sign Code was vague and strict application of another zoning district’s restrictions was not adequate - the 2’ allowable sign on a building of this size would not be useful.

It was pointed out that the 2’ restriction was based on the existence of two monument signs and suggested that reducing the number of signs and simply referring customers to the Medical Arts Building would eliminate the confusion of sign clutter

 

ACTION TAKEN

Motioned by Mr. Hannon, seconded by Mr. Goans to approve the variances to allow relocation and redesign of the King Pharmacy sign from the southern to the western elevation and replacement on the southern elevation with the LMH Wound Healing Center sign as proposed.

 

            Motion carried unanimously 7-0.

 

ITEM NO. 4:    MISCELLANEOUS  

There were no other issues to come before the Board.

 

ADJOURN  - 7:00 p.m.

 

Official minutes are on file in the Planning Department Office.