2003-11-17 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

6 Ms. Ruseau said that business went up significantly when the signs were projecting. Ms. Chris Oakley, owner of Oakley's Used Books in York Place, presented Council with a chart of gross sales she kept before and after the projecting signs were up, which showed an increase in business during the time the projecting signs were up. She said the projecting signs are needed to keep businesses viable. Mr. Crystal Lightburn, manager of a toy store in York Place, said that her business increased 25% when the projecting signs were up. Mr. Mike Womack, owner of the Celtic Knot in York Place, said he saw a spike in sales when the projecting signs were up. nd Ms. Cheri Lewis, 809 2 Street, N.E., a member of the BAR, said that thi s was a hard decision for the BAR, especially since the owner was told by staff that the sign was okay. She said she is not sure economic distress means an exception should be made. She said that railings and planters could be moved from below the signs. She said she feels whether the projecting signs really caused an increase in business should be examined. Ms. Lewis said that if Council wants to grant the appeal, they should amend the ordinance. The owner of a hair salon in York Place said that her customers cannot find her business without the signs. She said that stacked chairs often block her sign. Mr. Chuck Lewis, owner of York Place, said that the economy of the downtown mall is down and anything that can be done to help bring in more people will be rewarded later on. He said a directory is needed on the mall. Mr. Lynch asked Mr. Lewis to provide a history of the signage. Mr. Lewis said that High Tech Signs came up with a design for projecting signs, and prior to that sandwich boards were used. He said that when the signs were put flat against the building business was up, but not as much as when they were projecting. Mr. Cox said that the merchants of York Place have made an impression on him. Ms. Richards said she appreciates the wo rk of the BAR and does not like to question their decisions and their desire to protect the historic areas. She said Council has been advised that it has discretion to consider other issues when hearing an appeal and can consider this as a special case. She said these stores have no visibility from the mall, and feels allowing projecting signs would serve a public purpose because of the viability of ten small businesses. She said the effectiveness of the signs is a compelling argument. She said she woul d support the projecting signs and the original scroll work, noting that she thinks they are less beautiful without it. She said she thinks having the iron railing below the signs would be compatible and satisfy ADA requirements. Mr. Lynch said he agree s that each situation should be taken on its individual merit, but he is not convinced we really have a problem here. He said the signs are very illuminating now, and he does not see a lot of reason to go against the BAR decision. He said there is nothin g close on the mall to the primary colors of the signs and feels they are effective as they are now flush against the building. Mr. Caravati said one issue is how far off the ground the signs should be and how many there should be. He said he thinks th e projecting signs mounted in the original scroll work should be approved. He recommended asking the BAR to look at best practices throughout the country for how signs are dealt with in buildings with multiple businesses. He said there should be some perm anent blockage under the signs. Mr. Brown said that the applicants should satisfy the City's building officials regarding the ADA requirements.