05/18/1981 Board of Public Works Minutes

Home Browse Search

3 REGULAR MEETING MAY 18, 1981 that the argument of the public safety being involved was valid in this instance. He stated that the proposed signs contained much more information than just the referral to emergency. He wondered if the hospital was getting away from the original intent of the emergency signage by including all the other information. He stated that he was not totally convinced that, with the erection of two other signs on hospital property, the volume of information con - tained in the emergency sign was actually required. Mr. Yarger felt it would be to the motorists' advantage to have all of the informa- tion in one place and putting the emergency information first would highlight that aspect. He felt that, if the signs must be separated and the informational signs placed farther back on the hospital property, it would still cause confusion with motorists trying to read all the signs. He felt it was a more appropriate and safer method if all the information was contained on one sign. Mr. Hill commented that, based on the amount of traffic coming to the emergency room, he wondered if there was a need to include the other information on the sign. A representative of the hospital stated that, because of the one -way traffic pattern around the hospital, all three signs at the various locations containing all the information would be preferred. She stated that people have, in the past, experienced problems in getting back to the hospital when they have missed the first turn. Dr. Phil Myers, in charge of the emergency room, spoke in support of the signage. He did not feel that too many signs could be installed around the hospital complex. He talked about the large amount of traffic coming to the hospital from out of the immediate city limits and those individuals unfamiliar with the layout. Mr. Leszczynski agreed that the emergency signs were necessary. He stated that he was concerned about the necessity of the informational -type signs and the precedent which the Board would be setting if approved. Councilman Joseph T. Serge felt the more effective place for the signs would be on the tree lawn area. Council- man John Voorde asked if the city had any plans to revise the inter- section near the hospital as far as signalization. He talked about the overhead signage at other intersections, and wondered if this could be done at Navarre and Michigan. Mr. Kernan stated that this had been discussed and, if it would be of assistance, the Board would be happy to work with the hospital for the overhead signage. Mr. Leszczynski stated that, at the present time, there were no plans for improvements at that intersection. Mr. Kernan stated that the hanging of a sign at the intersection had been discussed. Mr. Gene Nichols, a representative of North American Signs, stated that originally the signs were proposed and referred to only the emergency room, but it was felt there would only be confusion with the cluttering of the other information the hospital wanted on the signs. Mr. Hill stated that the Board must consider the fact that the city currently had an ordinance which prohibits the use of the tree lawn area for this purpose. He stated that the city has received many complaints in the past concerning the use of the signs in the tree lawn area, and the city must, therefore, be very careful in terms of the effect any approval of the signs would have on the city's ability to enforce the ordinance. He stated that the Board recognized the public safety aspect of the proposed signs at the locations around the hospital, and he stated that the Board could only justify the location of the signs because of the emergency signage contained in the signs. Upon a motion made by Mr. Hill, seconded by Mr. Kernan and carried, the Board authorized the hospital to place the signs at the three locations proposed in the plans presented to the Board, (Navarre & Michigan, Michigan & Bartlett & West side of emergency room entrance), with the stipulation that the city be named -as an additional insured on the hospital's liability policy. A represen- tative of the hospital indicated that, if the city received complaints or comments in the future concerning the erection of the signs, the hospital would appreciate knowing about them. 1 1