May 18, 2023 Sign Board

[1. Call to Order]

[00:00:02]

ALL RIGHT. I'LL CALL TO ORDER THE CITY OF SOUTHLAKE SIGN BOARD MEETING FOR MAY 18TH, 2023, AND ASK IF THERE ARE ANY ADMINISTRATIVE COMMENTS.

NO, MR. CHAIRMAN. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. AGAIN, NO CHAIRMAN COMMENTS OTHER THAN WE'LL BE GLAD TO HAVE OUR CHAIRMAN BACK, HOPEFULLY AT THE NEXT MEETING.

WITH THAT, THE FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS ITEM NUMBER FIVE, WHICH IS THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE APRIL 20TH, 2023 SIGN BOARD MEETING.

[5. Consider: Approving the minutes from the April 20, 2023 Sign Board Meeting.]

AND IF THERE'S NO COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS, WE'RE WILLING TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM THE APRIL 20TH, 2023 SIGN BOARD MEETING.

I HAVE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE.

THAT ITEM CARRIES FOUR ZERO.

NEXT ITEM IN THE AGENDA IS ITEM NUMBER SIX.

[6. Consider: SV23-0008, Sign Variances for AllStates World Cargo located at 1080 Kimball Ave., Southlake, Texas.]

SO IF PERHAPS WE COULD GET THE THERE WE GO, THE RELEVANT SLIDES AND ANY QUESTIONS FOR RAGAN AFTER HE GIVES A BRIEF OVERVIEW.

ALL STATES WORLD CARGO IS.

I'M SORRY. THAT'S OKAY. I SAID RAGAN YOU'RE LIKE, WHAT? YEAH. ALLSTATES WORLD CARGO IS REQUESTING VARIANCES FOR TWO ATTACHED BUILDING SIGNS AND THEY HAVE A PORTION OF THE SIGN.

THAT'S THE LETTERS.

THE ALL STATES WORLD CARGO IS ALREADY UP ON THE BUILDING AND THEY ARE JUST REQUESTING VARIANCES FOR THE LOGO EDITION.

THE VARIANCES ARE FOR LOGO HEIGHT AND LOGO AREA.

THEY ARE ALLOWED A LOGO HEIGHT OF 20IN AND A LOGO AREA OF 10.92FT².

THE PROPOSED LOGO HEIGHT IS 49.93IN AND THE LOGO AREA IS 18.38FT².

AND IT'S THE SAME FOR BOTH SIDES OF THE BUILDING.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR JENNIFER ON THIS ONE? NOPE. OKAY.

SEEMS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.

I MEAN, I'M OKAY WITH IT.

I KNOW THAT IT'S LARGER THAN OUR ORDINANCE REQUIRES, BUT IT SEEMS TO KIND OF BE PROPORTIONAL.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ALL THINK, BUT.

YEAH, WE CAN CALL THE APPLICANT UP.

I GUESS I SHOULD DO THAT. I'M THINKING PUBLIC HEARING, AND WE DON'T HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING.

HOW ABOUT IF WE HEAR THE APPLICANT? HOW ARE YOU THIS EVENING? DOING WELL. HOW ARE YOU DOING? GOOD. IF YOU WOULD STAY.

YOU KNOW THE DRILL.

SURE. KURT HORAK, PRIORITY SIGNS AND GRAPHICS 605 VICKSBURG COURT SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS.

YEAH, THE LOGO, ALTHOUGH IT'S LARGER THAN THE ORDINANCE ALLOWS, IT'S STILL RELATIVELY SMALL COMPARED TO THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING.

AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S REALLY THE ONLY VARIANCE.

THEY COMPLIED WITH THE THE LETTERS.

THEY HAVE A COUPLE DOZEN LOCATIONS NATIONWIDE.

THEY ALL HAVE THIS TYPE OF BRANDING AND THEY JUST WANT TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THEIR BRANDING AT OTHER LOCATIONS.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? NO. OKAY.

THANK YOU. I'M SORRY.

I GUESS I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. OH, SORRY.

ON THE INTERNAL DRIVE, IS THERE A REASON, LIKE WOULD THE LOGO HELP FOR IDENTIFICATION? IS THERE A LOT OF TRAFFIC THAT COMES FROM THAT INTERACTION OR WOULD THEY BE OPEN TO JUST PUTTING THAT LOGO ON THE ONE THAT FACES THE STREET AND NOT HAVING THE VARIANCE IN THE BACK? YOU CAN REALLY SEE IT FROM BOTH SIDES.

KIMBALL KIND OF CURVES AROUND THERE AND YOU CAN SEE BOTH SIDES.

THEY KIND OF WANT TO KEEP IT SYMMETRICAL AND AND VISIBLE TO TRAFFIC GOING BOTH WAYS.

THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. I JUMPED THE GUN EARLIER.

THIS DOES NOT REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING.

BUT JUST TO REITERATE MY COMMENTS, UNLESS ANYBODY HAS STRONG OPINIONS, I THINK IT LOOKS FINE.

IT'S CERTAINLY PROPORTIONAL.

AND THE LOCATION, EVERYTHING DOESN'T DOESN'T BOTHER ME, BUT OBVIOUSLY, I'M ONE OF FOUR.

SO BE WILLING TO OR WOULD LIKE TO HEAR EVERYONE ELSE'S OPINIONS.

YOU KNOW, I THINK FROM MY STANDPOINT, THE FACT THAT IT'S IN THE LOCATION ON THAT BUILDING, THAT IT IS THAT HIGH DOESN'T BOTHER ME.

I THINK IT IS PROPORTIONAL.

I THINK IT'S A GOOD LOOKING GRAPHIC AND GOOD LOOKING LOGO THAT THAT FITS WELL WITH THAT.

I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT, TOO. I MEAN, I THINK JUST BASED ON THAT LOGO, THE PART THAT EXCEEDS THAT, THE VARIANCE IS REALLY JUST KIND OF A STRIP OF RED.

AND THEN IT'S IT'S NOT LIKE A SOLID.

SO I THINK IT LOOKS NICE.

ANY COMMENTS ON? NO COMMENTS. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. WELL, IF WE'RE GOOD TO GO HERE, LET'S CRAFT A MOTION AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS.

MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE THAT WE.

EXCUSE ME. APPROVE. CASE NUMBER 20 3-0008 SIGN VARIANTS FOR ALL STATES WORLD CARGO AND GRANTING THE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR BOTH LOGO HEIGHT AND LOGO AREA.

AND INCLUDING THE NORTH AND WEST ELEVATION.

CORRECT. AND AMENDING MY MOTION TO INCLUDE THE NORTH BOTH LOCATIONS AS REQUESTED.

[00:05:03]

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND, PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE.

THAT ITEM CARRIES FOUR ZEROS.

WELL, THANK YOU, SIR.

LAST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, SB23-0009.

[7. Consider: SV23-0009, Sign Variances for Southlake Storage located at 2060 E. Continental Blvd., Southlake, Texas.]

THEY ARE REQUESTING TO MOVE THEIR EXISTING SIGN WHICH SAYS STORAGE FROM THE LOWER LEVEL UP TO THE UPPER LEVEL.

AND THIS REQUIRES VARIANCES FOR A UPPER STOREY SIGN AND ALSO FOR VERTICAL ORIENTATION.

THE QUESTIONS. ANY QUESTIONS FOR JENNIFER? THANK YOU. OH, AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, JENNIFER, I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT IN WORK SESSION, BUT THE APPLICANT DIDN'T DO ANYTHING WRONG HERE.

THIS IS JUST SOMETHING THAT SLIPPED THROUGH ON PERMITTING THE FIRST TIME, CORRECT? YES. OKAY. THANK YOU.

IS THE APPLICANT HERE ON ITEM NUMBER SEVEN? HOW ARE YOU THIS EVENING? WOULD YOU BE KIND ENOUGH TO COME ON UP AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD? MY NAME IS TY.

I ACTUALLY LIVE IN MCKINNEY.

8770 STACY ROAD.

MCKINNEY, TEXAS. 75070.

AND DO YOU HAVE ARE YOU JUST HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS OR DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE? WE'RE ACTUALLY JUST LOOKING TO MOVE THE SIGN UP FOR OUR CUSTOMERS.

MAKE IT PRETTY A LITTLE AESTHETIC.

WE ARE OKAY WITH MOVING THAT SIGN IF YOU WANT US TO MOVE IT THIS WAY, WE CAN VERSUS VERTICAL.

SO I MEAN, WE CAN DO WHATEVER YOU GUYS WANT US TO DO ON THAT.

SO. OKAY.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? I GUESS MY ONLY COMMENT WOULD BE WHEN YOU SAY HORIZONTAL, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT AT THE TOP OF THE BUILDING, RIGHT? RIGHT ON THAT PIECE.

RIGHT ABOVE IT. YEAH.

THAT COULD BE AN OPTION IF YOU WANTED US TO FIX IT.

OKAY. I'M JUST CURIOUS BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO ME WHEN YOU MOVE THAT SIGN TO THE THIRD, THE THIRD FLOOR OF THE BUILDING, BASICALLY THE VISIBILITY DROPS DRAMATICALLY.

WHAT'S THE THOUGHT BEHIND MOVING IT UP THAT HIGH? WELL, WHAT WE'RE FINDING IS THAT PEOPLE ARE HAVING A HARD TIME SEEING IT THAT LOW, BECAUSE IF YOU'RE COMING IN FROM LIKE KIMBALL, THAT MAIN SIGN ACTUALLY BLOCKS IT. SO THEY WANT TO ACTUALLY JUST MOVE IT UP ABOVE THAT.

IT DOESN'T EVEN HAVE TO BE ALL THE WAY TO THE THIRD.

THEY JUST WANT IT ABOVE THAT SIGN ON.

KIMBALL BECAUSE WE'VE HAD A FEW COMPLAINTS OR CUSTOMERS NOT ABLE TO FIND IT OR WHATEVER.

SO. THAT WAS THEY JUST WANTED TO I GUESS IT'S JUST AN OPINION ON MY PART.

BUT IT SEEMS TO ME IF THE PROBLEM IS THE MONUMENT SIGN, THE MONUMENT SIGN IS ACCOMPLISHING WHAT YOU WANT TO ACCOMPLISH.

SO I'M JUST TRYING TO MAYBE FROM A DISTANCE, I GUESS, FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO SEE IT.

I MEAN, I DRIVE CONTINENTAL A LOT AND I'VE NEVER NOTICED THAT SIGN.

BUT YOU PUT IT ON THE THIRD STORY, I'M GOING TO PROBABLY NOTICE IT EVEN LESS.

JUST AN OPINION.

SO THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. THANKS.

ITEM NUMBER SEVEN DOES NOT REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING.

I GUESS I'LL SHARE MY COMMENTS.

I KIND OF AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER ROTHMEIER.

I MEAN, ULTIMATELY, I'M NOT SURE THIS DOES A LOT OF GOOD.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME, IT'S IN A LOCATION WHERE I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'RE REALLY SETTING ANY KIND OF PRECEDENT, SO I'M NOT NECESSARILY LOSING SLEEP OVER IT.

I DON'T THINK THAT PUTTING IT ON THE TOP OF BUILDING WOULD FLY WITH CITY COUNCIL.

THAT'S JUST MY THOUGHT.

YOU'RE WELCOME TO TO PRESENT THAT TO CITY COUNCIL, ASSUMING THE VOTE GOES WELL TONIGHT.

BUT ALL THINGS CONSIDERED, THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS CASE, I THINK I'M OKAY WITH IT IF YOU ALL ARE.

PERSONALLY, I THINK IT LOOKS STRANGE DOWN AT THE BOTTOM AND I THINK IT'S GOING TO LOOK BETTER UP THERE.

SO I AM IN FAVOR OF IT.

COMMISSIONER DRISCOLL, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS? SHOULD WE CONSIDER THE IS IT THE HORIZONTAL JUST BECAUSE FOR PRECEDENT, IS IT? DENNIS I DON'T THINK WE WOULD BE ABLE, I MEAN, THAT'S NOT BEFORE US TONIGHT, RIGHT? WOULD WE BE ABLE TO CONSIDER HORIZONTAL OR NO? YES, YOU CERTAINLY COULD.

I MEAN, IF YOU DISAGREE WITH THE VARIANCE REQUESTED ALLOWING FOR THE VERTICAL ORIENTATION, YOU COULD INCLUDE THAT IN A MOTION AND PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION THAT IT BE ORIENTED.

HORIZONTALLY, IF THAT'S THE BOARD'S CHOOSING.

[00:10:01]

I MEAN, TO ME, THAT MAKES SENSE.

IF YOU WANT TO MAYBE CRAFT THAT IN THE MOTION.

AND THEN THAT WAY CITY COUNCIL AT LEAST HAS TWO OPTIONS.

BECAUSE IT'S I MEAN, KIND OF A STRAIGHTFORWARD DEAL.

IT'S EITHER GOING TO BE YES OR NO ON HORIZONTAL OR VERTICAL.

IT'S NOT A COMPLICATED ONE.

SO, OKAY.

IF NO ONE ELSE HAS ANYTHING ELSE, BE WILLING TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THIS ONE AS WELL.

MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE.

CASE NUMBER SV 20 3-0009 GRANTING THE VARIANCES REQUESTED FOR VERTICAL ORIENTATION AND UPPER STORY LOCATION AND RECOMMENDING THAT THE APPLICANT ALSO PRESENT OPTIONS FOR A HORIZONTAL ORIENTATION WHEN PRESENTING THE CASE TO COUNSEL.

VERY GOOD. I HAVE A MOTION DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE.

ALL RIGHT, THAT ITEM CARRIES 4-0.

CONGRATULATIONS AND THANK YOU.

EVERYBODY WHO WAS HERE TONIGHT FOR THE SIGN BOARD MEETING WILL ADJOURN.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.