Sunday, June 14, 2015

New Surgery Center Planned on N. Section Street

Fairhope, Alabama. (


411 N. Section St.
A new ambulatory (outpatient) care center is planned for the three-story building at 411 N. Section St. directly across from the elementary school, complete with hyperbaric (pure oxygen) chamber-rooms to promote faster wound healing.

According to the Mayo clinic:

"Hyperbaric oxygen therapy involves breathing pure oxygen in a pressurized room or tube. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy is a well-established treatment for decompression sickness, a hazard of scuba diving. Other conditions treated with hyperbaric oxygen therapy include serious infections, bubbles of air in your blood vessels, and wounds that won't heal as a result of diabetes or radiation injury."

Ronald Lang of Catalyst CRE Inc. said  there will be a 12,800 square ft. 'wound care' center with an AAAHC accredited surgery center on the third floor.

Another 22,000 square feet will be used by various specialty doctors in the ambulatory surgery center.


An application by Brian Lombatis of Complete Signs llc. to install a LED digital sign there was denied by the city's Board of Adjustments and Appeals, because it would not conform with the city's  ordinance prohibiting signs that "flash or illuminate" intermittently.
Board of Adjustments

The ability for the sign's operation to be modified at some point was a factor for denial as well.

The city's Planning Department had previously denied the request; and the applicant exercised his  right of appeal to the Board.

Lombatis contended the sign did not "flash," but stayed the same for long periods, then quickly switched to another static display: the various doctor's names would alternate at intervals.

He said confusion arose when someone in the Planing Dept. gave preliminary approval for the sign and it had already been been purchased ($20,000).

Lombatis left, Lang right
The applicants may appeal the decision to circuit court, or ask the city council to change the applicable sign laws; but indicated a traditional "complex" sign (multiple names) would probably be a better solution: The sign that was purchased could be used at another project.

According to online records, Fairhope Commercial Investments Llc. owns the building, along with partners Park and Hudson ll and 411 N. Section  St. Llc. -- both of Pensacola Fl.

(The digital sign at the elementary school across the street is not covered by the city's zoning laws -- since it is on county-owned property.)

Digital sign example

 examples of various hyperbaric chambers.


Anonymous said...

Who allowed that gigantic building there anyway?

Anonymous said...

It is there so move on , what a great use of the building

Anonymous said...

Sumbodypulled strings, just like always

Anonymous said...

If it's anything like the glaring sign on 181 near 104 (a doctor's office) I hope they don't allow it. It's so distracting and way too bright at night.

Anonymous said...

Yes, we don't want any lighted digital signs on Section Street. Oh wait, there is already one in front of the elementary school across the street. Oops. Where are the visitors to this building going to park? Not nearly enough parking spaces for the size of the building. Another variance allowed by the mayor and his minions.

Publisher said...

The digital sign at the elementary school is county property, not covered by city zoning (sign) laws.

Publisher said...

Most of Hwy 181 is outside of city limits, where no zoning or sign laws apply.

Residents there have chosen not to adopt any of their own -- or annex into the city.

Anonymous said...

To me the city and and county zones do not make sense. There are streets in the middle of what should be city that are zoned county.

Anonymous said...

things that make you go hmmm

Anonymous said...

why would across the street be county? sounds fishy

Anonymous said...

the elementary school is county property (School Board's).

Anonymous said...

So, it is still in the city of Fairhope and it should be jurisdictioned by their sign ordinance. What's good for the goose, etc.

Anonymous said...

What is right or "should be" has nothing to do with the law ... the way it is .

Anonymous said...
Here ya go.....As of 6/21

Anonymous said...

The First Amendment broadly prohibits the enactment of any law "abridging the freedom of speech." It makes no exception for certain messages, ideas or subject matter, nor does it insulate legislation enacted with supposedly benevolent intentions