>> THAT CONCLUDES OUR CITY OF SOUTH LAKE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AND
[1. Call to Order.]
[00:00:04]
STARTS [NOISE] OUR CITY OF SOUTH LAKE SIGN BOARD MEETING FOR AUGUST 8TH, 2024.NO ADMINISTRATIVE COMMENTS AT THIS POINT, NO CHAIRMAN'S COMMENTS. LET'S SEE.
[5. Consider: Approving the minutes from the June 6, 2024, Sign Board Meeting. ]
WE'VE GOT ITEM NUMBER 5 IS CONSIDERATION APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE JUNE 6TH, 2024 SIGNBOARD MEETING.EVERYBODY'S BEEN HANDED A COPY OF THOSE MINUTES, HAD CHANCE TO REVIEW AND APPROVE COMMENT.
ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS BEFORE WE ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
>> MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION.
WE APPROVE ITEM NUMBER 5 ON OUR AGENDA THIS EVENING.
SIGNBOARD AGENDA THIS EVENING, WHICH IS THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE JUNE 6TH, 2024 SIGNBOARD MEETING.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION, WE HAVE A SECOND. GOOD VOTE, PLEASE.
PASSES FOUR VOTES, POSITIVE, ONE ABSTENTION.
NOW WE'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 5 ON OUR AGENDA,
[6. Consider: MSP24-0002, Master Sign Plan for Champions DFW Realty, LLC, located at 880 S. Village Center Dr., Southlake, Texas. ]
MASTER SIGN PLAN FOR CHAMPIONS DFW REALTY.>> CHAMPIONS DFW REALTY IS REQUESTING APPROVAL OF A MASTER SIGN PLAN FOR 880, SOUTH VILLAGE CENTER DRIVE.
>> APOLOGIES AT SITE OF NUMBER 6.
COULDN'T READ. SO GO AHEAD. I'M SORRY.
>> THIS MASTER SIGN PLAN IS FOR THREE PERMANENT SIGN BAM AREAS FOR UPPER STORY SIGNS, AND ALSO COVERS LETTER HEIGHT AND LOGO HEIGHT.
HERE'S AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE SITE.
THERE'S ONE HERE ON THE NORTH, AND THEN THEY'RE PROPOSING TWO ON THE WEST SIDE.
A VIEW OF THE BUILDING. THESE ARE THE THREE PROPOSED SIGNS.
ALL THREE SIGNS ARE CLASSIFIED AS UPPER STORY SIGNS.
THAT IS ONE OF THE VARIANCE REQUESTS, AND THEN THEY'RE ALSO ASKING FOR APPROVAL OF THE OVERALL SIGN BAND AREA, WHICH WOULD BE A MAXIMUM LETTER HEIGHT OR LOGO HEIGHT OF 30".
THEY'RE ASKING FOR THAT TO HAVE FLEXIBILITY FOR FUTURE TENANTS SO THAT THEY'RE ABLE TO SWITCH OUT THOSE SIGNS WITHOUT HAVING TO COME BACK HERE.
THEN THIS IS JUST ANOTHER VIEW OF THE NORTH ELEVATION AND A VIEW OF THE WEST ELEVATION.
THEN THIS IS JUST SHOWING WHERE THE FIRST AND SECOND FLOOR DIVISION IS.
THESE TWO SIGNS, EVEN THOUGH THEY LOOK LIKE LOWER STORY SIGNS, THEY ARE CLASSIFIED AS UPPER STORY SIGNS.
THESE ARE ENLARGED VIEWS OF THE FIRST THREE SIGNS THAT THEY LIKE TO PUT ON THE BUILDING.
THEN THIS IS JUST AN ADJACENT SIGN FOR GMI.
THEN THIS WAS ALSO THE MAGNOLIA SIGN THAT WAS APPROVED BY A SIGNED VARIANCE.
>> REAL QUICK, GOING BACK, THAT SIGN HEIGHT WAS 20.
PERFECT. LEFT IT ON THE KEY PAGE.
>> THE REASON WE'RE CONSIDERING AN UPPER UPPER STORY IS BECAUSE IT'S ABOVE THE FIRST STORY PLATE, RIGHT?
>> THEN THIS ONE IS OBVIOUSLY AN UPPER STORY SIGN, BUT THE OTHER TWO ARE CONSIDERED UPPER STORY AS WELL.
>> THESE THREE SPACES THAT ARE NOW, THE SIGNS GOING TO BE LOCATED ON THE SPACE THAT'S OCCUPIED BY THE [OVERLAPPING] SIGN OWNER?
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
DO WE WANT TO DELIBERATE THIS BEFORE WE CALL UP THE APPLICANT? I THINK I GUESS, ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? MAYBE WE CAN SEE HOW MUCH WE NEED TO DIG INTO THIS.
I GUESS THE UPPER STORY, TO YOUR POINT, THE UPPER STORY REQUESTS ARE UNDERSTOOD, AND I GUESS REALLY IT'S JUST DO WE WANT TO GIVE THEM THE CLEARANCE AHEAD OF TIME FOR UP TO 30 INCHES?
>> GENERALLY SPEAKING, AS LONG AS THE SIGN FITS WITHIN THE DESIGNATED SPACE, I DON'T [OVERLAPPING].
>> I THINK THAT WOULD BE THE REQUIREMENT IS MY UNDERSTANDING, YES.
>> WITHIN THE DESIGNATED SPACE, IT'S JUST, REALLY AM RELUCTANT TO MAKE THAT APPROVAL BECAUSE,
[00:05:01]
SOMEBODY MAY DECIDE TO TAKE IT RIGHT TO THE MARGIN AND, JUST MAKE IT SOMETHING THAT WE WOULDN'T APPROVE OF OTHERWISE, IF THEY WEREN'T ABLE TO JUST DO IT ON THEIR OWN.AS LONG AS IT WAS, KEPT WITHIN THE RATIO WAS THE SAME, BUT THERE'S NO WAY TO ENFORCE THAT IF WE GIVE THEM JUST BLANKET COVERAGE FOR IT.
>> TWO OF THESE I THINK ARE INWARD FACING FOR THE OFFICE DEVELOPMENT, CORRECT? I THINK AND ONE OF THEM IS OUTWARD FACING FOR VILLAGE CENTER.
>> THERE'S ONE THAT'S FACING NORTH THAT'S FACING THE VILLAGE CENTER AND THEN THE OTHER TWO ARE FACING WEST TOWARD THE PARKING LOT.
>> I GUESS THE NEARBY SIGN, I THINK YOU SAID IT WAS 25 INCHES.
IS THAT WHAT THE PREVIOUS? I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT'S THAT, IF YOU DON'T MIND.
>> THIS ONE'S 20 AND 26, OR ALMOST 26.5.
I'M GLAD TO HAVE FULL ON IT, BUT THEN AGAIN, TEND TO HAVE THAT ROLE HERE.
I DON'T THINK THEY'RE GOING TO DO ANYTHING HIDEOUS, BUT, YOU NEVER CAN TELL.
>> THE ONE THING I GUESS I WOULD REQUEST, I GUESS IF YOU CAN FLIP BACK TO THE SLIDES THAT SHOW, YES.
THANK YOU FOR READING MY MIND.
THE EXAMPLES THEY'RE SHOWING, THE BLUE SQUARES ARE HELPFUL TO UNDERSTAND HOW BIG THAT AREA COULD BE, BUT THE SIGNS THEY HAVE WITHIN THEM ARE MUCH SMALLER THAN WHAT THEY COULD END UP BEING.
[OVERLAPPING] AT A MINIMUM, IN WHATEVER VERSION WE COULD HAVE MOVED THIS ALONG, I WOULD REQUEST THE APPLICANT DISPLAY THOSE SIGNS IN A MANNER WHERE THEY'RE SHOWN AS LARGE AS THEY POSSIBLY CAN BE FOR COUNSEL, SO COUNSEL CAN VISUALIZE THAT AND JUST KNOW THAT IT'S MAXIMUMS, BUT POTENTIALLY SMALLER.
I THINK THAT THE EXAMPLE THAT'S GIVEN HERE IS A LITTLE MISLEADING IN TERMS OF IT'S, SMALLER THAN WHAT COULD ACTUALLY END UP HAPPENING.
I THINK AT A MINIMUM, I'D ASK FOR THAT TO BE CORRECTED.
>> WELL, THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING, IT'S LIKE, THE LOOK OF THE SIGN HAS TO DO WITH THE RATIO OF THE LETTER HEIGHT OR WHATEVER THEIR LOGO IS BECAUSE YOU KNOW HOW WE HAVE A LOT OF SIGNS THAT THE LOGO IS THE CONTROLLING FACTOR AS FAR AS BEING THE LARGEST ELEMENT OF IT.
WITHOUT, ANY INPUT INTO WHAT THEY DECIDE TO PUT THERE LATER, THEY CAN MAKE IT ANY PROPORTION THEY WANT.
>> I THINK THAT IS THEIR REQUEST, YES.
I'M PERSONALLY OKAY WITHIN A BOX, AND I GUESS WE COULD ARGUE ABOUT IS THAT BOX 30 " OR SOMETHING SMALLER.
I'M OKAY, BUT I'M ONLY ONE VOTE.
I DON'T KNOW. DOES ANYONE ELSE WANT TO COMMENT ON THIS ONE?
>> I'M COMFORTABLE WITH IT, JUST GIVEN THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING, AND IT SEEMS THE EXAMPLE SHE SHOWED THAT WAS 26 SEEMED PROPORTIONATE TO ME.
>> THEY APPEAR TO, PROPORTIONATELY LOOK APPROPRIATE ON THE BUILDING AS DEPICTED.
THEY DO NOW. IT'S JUST MAKING SURE THAT BOX STAYS THAT SAME SIZE.
>> IT'S AND THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE LIKE, RENT PER DAY SPACE HERE.
I DON'T SEE THE TENANT CHANGING THAT OFTEN.
I DON'T REALLY THINK THAT WE'RE ENCUMBERING, WHOEVER IS GOING TO BE MOVING IN THERE WITH THAT BIG OF A TASK TO COME BACK AND ASK FOR APPROVAL FOR WHAT THEY WANT TO PUT THERE.
>> IT'S NOT THEY'RE GOING TO BE CHANGING WEEKLY.
THE GUIDANCE THIS EVENING CAN EITHER BE WE'RE COMFORTABLE PRE APPROVING SIGN LOCATIONS AND SIZES WITHIN PARAMETERS OF X OR Y OR WHATEVER IT IS, OR WE'RE NOT COMFORTABLE APPROVING THAT, AND WE WANT TO JUST STICK TO THE ORDINANCE UNTIL THERE'S A SPECIFIC REQUEST IN FRONT OF US? IS THAT ARE THOSE THE TWO OPTIONS?
>> WELL, YOU CAN APPROVE THE SIGNS AS THEY SHOW THEM FOR THE CHAMPIONS DFW AND THE QUANTUM BECAUSE THOSE ARE THE SIGNS THAT THEY WANT NOW.
[00:10:06]
BUT THE SECOND PART OF THAT REQUEST IS THEY WANT TO HAVE THE SIGN BANDS FOR FUTURE TENANTS TO HAVE SOME FLEXIBILITY.>> I GUESS, ARE WE ABLE TO TIGHTEN UP THE MASTER SIGN PLAN REQUEST AND STILL HAVE THOSE SIGNS BE COMPLIANT?
>> I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU MEAN BY COMPLIANT BECAUSE THEY'RE ALL GOING TO BE UPPER STORY SIGNS.
>> DID THEY ALL NEED TO BE 30 INCH LETTER HEIGHT AND LOGO HEIGHT?
>> YOU COULD SHRINK THAT IF YOU WANTED TO GO DOWN, AND STILL APPROVE THESE SIGNS.
>> I'M CERTAINLY COMFORTABLE FOR SURE WITH WHAT'S BEING SHOWN TODAY HONESTLY.
I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THE REQUEST.
I GUESS I'LL LET YOU GUYS HASH IT OUT ON WHAT YOU GUYS WANT.
>> I DON'T KNOW. I'M UNCOMFORTABLE ABOUT A PRE APPROVAL FOR THE MAX AT 30, AND IF WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE, IT'S BASICALLY GIVING THEM A BIG SANDBOX TO PLAY IN.
AT LEAST MY PERSONAL POSITION ON IT IS APPROVING THESE AS THEY ARE PROPOSED, BUT NOT A BLANKET APPROVAL FOR FUTURE STUFF.
I AGREE WE SEE PEOPLE COME IN HERE ALL THE TIME THAT MEET THE PARAMETERS THAT WERE APPROVED, FIVE YEARS AGO OR 10 YEARS AGO, AND IT JUST DOESN'T LOOK RIGHT WITH THEIR NEW LOGO AND DESIGN AND ARTWORK OR WHATEVER.
IT RUNS CONTRARY TO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE.
ALTHOUGH, I CAN APPRECIATE WHY THE APPLICANT WOULD ASK THAT.
WHAT DO YOU GUYS WANT TO PROPOSE? DO YOU WANT TO PROPOSE SOMETHING SMALLER? DO YOU WANT TO PROPOSE, BECAUSE THEY'RE ASKING FOR A MASTER SIGN PLAN.
I THINK THEY NEED GENERAL CRITERIA.
WELL, THE MOTION BE MADE THAT WE'RE JUST APPROVING THESE THREE SIGNS AS PROPOSED PERIOD, IN DENIAL OF THE BAND SIGNED?
>> YES. I MEAN, [OVERLAPPING].
TO PROVIDE FLEXIBILITY FOR TENANTS.
YOU COULD ESSENTIALLY PROPOSE THE LETTER SIZE AND LOGOS AS REPRESENTED ON THESE CURRENT SIGNS AND.
>> [OVERLAPPING] AS THE MASTER SIGN PLANS.
>> A LOCATION OF SIGN BAND, BUT NOT GREATER IN HEIGHT THAN WHAT'S REPRESENTED BY THE SIGNS THEMSELVES, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.
>> THE MASTER SIGN PLAN IS SIZED TO WHAT THE ACTUAL PROPOSED SIGNS ARE TODAY AND NOT GENERAL PARAMETERS?
>> CORRECT. BASICALLY, THE BAND IS TO PROVIDE PROXIMITY OF WHERE WHATEVER SIGNS BROUGHT IN WOULD FIT.
BUT YOU COULD RESTRICT THEM TO THE LETTER SIZE REPRESENTED ON EACH ONE OF THESE EXAMPLE SIGNS THAT ARE INSIDE THE BAND.
>> I'M WILLING TO GO WITH THE MAJORITY, BUT I GUESS WE JUST NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, IF THE CHAMPION SIGNS ARE SMALLER, THE MASTER SIGN PLAN IS GOING TO GET SET TO THAT.
WHEN CHAMPIONS MOVES OUT, AND SOMEBODY COMES IN AND WANTS TO DO A NEW SIGN, WE'RE GOING TO SEE A VARIANCE TO THE MASTER SIGN PLAN.
WE CAN'T ASK THEM, WHY IN THE WORLD ARE YOU DOING A VARIANCE TO THE MASTER SIGN PLANS BECAUSE WE SET IT UP SO THAT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ASK FOR ONE.
>> I KNOW, BUT WE GET SIGNED PLANS HERE IN TOWN SQUARE, WHERE THEY ASKED TO MODIFY THE MASTER SIGN PLAN.
I JUST DON'T WANT TO LEAVE IT OPEN ENDED.
>> I GUESS I'M JUST SAYING I'M COMFORTABLE WITHIN THE PARAMETERS I DREW UP, I'M COMFORTABLE THAT THAT DOESN'T LOOK CRAZY.
>> [OVERLAPPING] WHAT THEY'RE PRESENTING HERE IS GOOD.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SAYING JUST DON'T LEAVE THE GATE OPEN TO DO WHATEVER YOU WANT.
>> DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO COME UP AND COMMENT ON ANY OF THIS OR IF YOU DO, YOU'LL HAVE TO COME UP AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
MY ADDRESS IS 2604 PEBBLETON DRIVE, FORT WORTH TEXAS.
I THINK THAT YOU ALL DID A PRETTY GOOD JOB OF PRESENTING IT.
I JUST WANTED TO PRESENT MYSELF FOR ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AND MAYBE I CAN HELP ALLEVIATE SOME OF THE CONCERN.
I HEAR A BIG CONCERN FOR THE 30-INCH OVERALL HEIGHT.
THE THOUGHT BEHIND THAT IS IS TO ALLOW THE SIGNS OR FUTURE SIGNS TO POTENTIALLY MEET THAT BUILDING.
THAT'S WHY WE ALSO LIMITED THE WIDTH
[00:15:04]
SO THAT WAY WE WOULDN'T HAVE HUGE SIGNS GOING ON THERE WIDTH WISE.TO HAVE A 30-INCH SIGN THAT'S LIMITED TO THAT WIDTH, YOU'RE PRETTY RESTRICTED AT THAT POINT IS OUR THOUGHT.
ALSO FOR THE LOGO TO BE VERY VISIBLE MOVING FORWARD.
>> WE'RE SHOWING THREE DIFFERENT EXAMPLES HERE, SO HOW MANY DO YOU THINK THERE WOULD BE OVERALL IN THE END, THE MAXIMUM THAT WOULD BE THERE? IS IT JUST THESE THREE?
>> IT WOULD JUST BE THOSE THREE LOCATIONS.
>> WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS IF ANY ONE OF THESE THREE TENANTS CHANGES, YOU WANT TO BE ABLE TO ADJUST YOUR SIGN WITHIN THE PARAMETERS THAT YOU'RE SHOWING HERE?
I MEAN, YOU HAVE A 30-INCH SIGN NEXT TO THESE THAT ARE SMALLER.
NOT VERY SYMMETRICAL POTENTIALLY.
>> WELL, I MEAN, IF YOU LOOK OVER HERE, THIS QUANTUM ONE, THE LOGO, THAT'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE LARGER.
I DON'T KNOW. IT'S GOING TO BE HARD TO DO A ONE SIZE FITS ALL THAT JUST SAYS THAT EVERYTHING IS GOING TO BE LOVELY AND IF IT FITS WITHIN THIS BOX.
>> I THINK ONE OF THE POINTS THAT HE MAKES THAT MAKES ME FEEL A LITTLE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THIS IS THAT THEY ARE LIMITING THE WIDTH, AND SO IT WOULD LOOK THERE'S NOT A LOT OF THINGS THAT WOULD FILL IN FULL 30 INCHES ON TOP TO BOTTOM, AND THEN IT WOULD LOOK DISPROPORTIONATE.
THAT DOES MAKE ME ACTUALLY FEEL LITTLE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THE IDEA.
>> ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT, I GUESS.
I THINK WE'RE GOOD. THANK YOU.
WE'LL SEE WHAT WE CAN CRAFT UP HERE AND MOVE FORWARD.
ANY IDEAS ON WHAT YOU GUYS WANT TO?
>> WELL, AS LONG AS IT'S RESTRICTED TO ONLY THE THREE SIGNS AND NO LARGER THAN WHAT'S SHOWN HERE FOR EITHER ONE OF THE EXAMPLES, I THINK WE'RE SAFE.
>> I'LL TAKE A STAB AT IT AND SEE IF IT PASSES.
>> MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE ITEM NUMBER 6 ON OUR SIGNBOARD AGENDA, CASE NUMBER MSP24-0002, SUBJECT TO THE STAFF REPORT DATED AUGUST 2ND, 2024.
BUT NOTING THAT THE APPROVAL IS JUST FOR THESE THREE SIGNS AS PROPOSED, AND THAT THE SIGN BAND WILL BE LIMITED TO THE SIZE OF THESE SIGNS AS WELL, NOT THE 30 INCHES.
>> IN CURRENT LOCATION ON THE BUILDING?
>> LIMITING IT TO ANY ONE OF THE LETTER SIZES REPRESENTED IN THE THREE EXAMPLES WITH THE QUANTUM, I THINK, POSSIBLY BEING THE LARGER.
IT WOULD NOT EXCEED THE LARGEST OF THOSE SIGNS REPRESENTED.
>> YOU'RE SAYING DOES NOT EXCEED THE LARGEST OF THE THREE LOCATIONS.
>> WITH THE CLARIFICATION THAT THE SIGN BAND BE THE EQUIVALENT OF THE LARGEST OF ONE OF THESE THREE SIGNS PROPOSED.
>> I THINK WE UNDERSTAND THAT.
>> I STATED THAT. SOUNDS LIKE WE'VE GOT A MOTION.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? LET'S VOTE.
MOTION FAILS. WELL, WE HAVE TO KEEP GOING UNTIL WE GET A MOTION THAT PASSES. THAT'S FUN.
WE HAVEN'T HAD THIS IN A WHILE.
I GUESS THAT THE COMMISSIONERS ON MY RIGHT, YOUR LEFT, I GUESS WHAT WOULD YOU WANT TO GARNER SUPPORT HERE?
>> I FEEL LIKE WE SHOULD JUST APPROVE THESE SIGNS, AND THAT'S IT.
I THINK TO MAKE IT FIT, YOU CAN TAKE ANY LETTERS YOU WANT AND PUSH IT OUT TO THAT SIZE. I DON'T KNOW.
I JUST THINK YOU COULD COME BACK TO BITE US.
[00:20:04]
>> I'M ACTUALLY OKAY WITH THE PROPOSAL AS THEY'RE REQUESTING IT.
>> YEAH. THAT'S WHAT I AM TOO.
COMMISSIONER'S REYNOLD SPRINGER, BRISCO, I GUESS, DO YOU WANT IT OF THE THREE OR, LIKE, SPECIFICALLY THE THREE OF EACH SIZE AND EACH LOCATION?
>> THE FIRST, THE LARGEST OF THE THREE.
>> WELL, THEN WE'RE AT A STALL WHAT.
>> VERY RESTRICTIVE, SOMEWHAT RESTRICTIVE, NO RESTRICTIVE.
IT'S 8:30 AT NIGHT, A LONG DAY. [LAUGHTER]
>> WE NEED FOUR PEOPLE, YES? THREE.
>> THREE. [BACKGROUND] IT SEEMS AS PRESENTED HAS THE LEAST LIKELIHOOD TO PASS.
>> YEAH. THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING THE THREE OF YOU NEED TO AGREE ON SOMETHING.
>> YEAH. AGAIN, APPROVING WHAT IS PRESENTED TODAY, BUT THAT [BACKGROUND] THE SIGN BAND IS MAX TO THE SMALLEST LETTERS, THE SMALLEST OF EACH OF THESE?
>> I THINK SHE'S SAYING TO WHATEVER THEY ARE ON THE PAGE.
>> I MEAN, IF SOUTHLAKE DERMATOLOGY MOVES IN HERE, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FIT SOUTHLAKE DERMATOLOGY INSIDE THIS BOX.
IF ANA MOVING COMES IN THERE, THEY ONLY GOT TO FIT INSIDE THE BOX.
IF WE'RE GOING TO SAY YOU DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO APPROVE A TARGET AREA THAT SAYS YOU CAN'T EXCEED THIS.
BUT YOU CAN FILL THAT LETTER BOX UP IF YOU WANT.
THE OTHER OPTION IS TO APPROVE WHAT WE HAVE RIGHT HERE AND TELL THEM THAT ANY OTHER SIGNS HAVE TO COME BACK FOR APPROVAL.
>> WHICH TO ME, SEEMS LIKE THE LOGICAL WAY TO DO IT.
>> LET'S TRY THAT. MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE ITEM NUMBER 6 ON OUR SIGNBOARD AGENDA, CASE NUMBER MSP24-0002.
THAT THE SIGNS ARE APPROVED AS PRESENTED AND THAT THERE IS NO PRE-APPROVAL ON SIGN BAND.
>> BASICALLY THE PARAMETERS ARE THE ONES THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED TODAY FOR EACH LOCATION PERIOD.
>> FOR CLARIFICATION, WHATEVER LETTER, LOGO, SIZE IS REPRESENTED IS WHAT THEY ARE PERMITTED REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE COPY OF THAT SIGN REPRESENTS.
>> I BELIEVE THAT'S THE CASE, AND THAT BECOMES THE MASTER SIGN PLAN.
>> DENNIS I WAS MORE IN LINE IN THE THING.
>> IF IT HELPS, WE WERE EXAMINING THE ACTUAL LETTER SIZE OF EACH OF THOSE.
>> WHICH THEY'RE ACTUALLY BELOW THE MAXIMUM LETTER SIZE THAT IS PERMITTED WITH EACH ONE OF THOSE BANDS, WHICH I THINK ONE OF THEM, THE CHAMPION SIGN, THEY'RE PERMITTED UP TO A 16-INCH SIGN BASED ON THEIR DISTANCE FROM THE DRIVEWAY OR ROADWAY, AND 20-INCH ON A LOGO.
THE OTHER TWO SIGNS, I THINK ARE PERMITTED 14-INCH LETTERS WITH THE [BACKGROUND] 17.5 INCH LOGO.
THOSE MEET THE SIGNED ORDINANCE AND THOSE THAT ARE REPRESENTED THERE ARE ALL BELOW THAT.
WOULD THE BOARD CONSIDER APPROVING THE MASTER SIGN PLAN WITH THE THREE SIGN BANDS SUBJECT TO EACH OF THOSE MEETING THE LETTER SIZE PERMITTED BY THE SIGN ORDINANCE?
>> BASICALLY STRIKING THE HEIGHT VARIANCE?
>> BUT OTHERWISE, YOU VOTE LETTER HEIGHT AND LOGO HEIGHT VARIANCE?
[00:25:01]
>> AN OPTION HERE IS JUST TO PROVE IT SUBJECT TO WHAT THE SIGN ORDINANCE WOULD ALLOW FOR LETTER LOGO SIZE AT EACH ONE OF THOSE LOCATIONS WITHIN THE BOUNDARY OF THAT SIGN BAND.
>> YOU BASICALLY BE PROPOSING TO APPROVE THIS, BUT NOT GRANTING THE VARIANCE ON ANY OF THEM FOR LOGO OR LETTER HEIGHT?
>> THAT WOULD BE THE SIMPLE MOTION.
>> BUT WE'RE DOING A MASTER SIGN PLAN HERE THAT SAYS THAT ANYBODY THAT COMES IN IN THE FUTURE, WE'VE STILL GOT A ARBITRARY SIGN THAT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO.
>> WELL, MASTER SIGN PLAN IS SAYING, THESE ARE THE THREE LOCATIONS THAT THEY CAN BE IN, AND THAT THEY CAN HAVE UPPER STORY SIGNS.
THAT'S WHAT THE MASTER SIGN PLAN WOULD BE.
>> OTHERWISE, COMPLY WITH THE SIGN.
>> SO NOT GRANTING THE HEIGHTS LETTER HEIGHT.
>> PROVED IS PRESENTED EXCEPT NOT GRANTING THE VARIANCE FOR LETTER HEIGHT AND LOGO HEIGHT.
I THINK THAT WILL GET YOU WHAT YOU NEED FOR TONIGHT.
>> YEAH. REVISING MY MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER 6 ON OUR AGENDA THAT WE ARE APPROVING THESE SIGNS AS PROPOSED, BUT NOT GRANTING THE VARIANCE FOR THE LETTER HEIGHT AND LOGO HEIGHT.
WE HAVE A MOTION, DO WE HAVE A SECOND?
CONGRATULATIONS, AND GOOD LUCK AT CITY COUNCIL.
WE HAVEN'T HAD A VOTE LIKE THAT IN A WHILE, SO WE'RE GETTING TIRED.
THE LAST ITEM FOR THIS EVENING,
[7. Consider: MSP24-0003, Amendment to the Master Sign Plan for Methodist Southlake Hospital, located at 335-451 E. SH 114 and 1205 N. White Chapel Blvd., Southlake, Texas. ]
THANK GOD IS ITEM 7 ON OUR AGENDA.THE LAST TIME, CONSIDERATION, AN AMENDMENT TO THE MASTER SIGN PLAN FOR METHODIST SOUTH LAKE HOSPITAL.
WE'LL SEE IF WE CAN TOP OURSELVES HERE AND GIVE IT A SHOT.
>> METHODIST SOUTHLAKE MEDICAL CENTER IS JUST REQUESTING AN AMENDMENT TO THEIR MASTER SIGN PLAN TO INCREASE THE SIZE OF TWO ATTACHED BUILDING SIGNS, AND THEN THEY'RE ALSO REQUESTING TO ADD AN OFF-SITE MONUMENT SIGN.
THIS IS JUST THE TEXAS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE.
AS A REMINDER, I'M HAPPY TO GO THROUGH IT IF YOU WANT.
I GUESS WITH REGARD TO EMERGENCY SIGNAGE, THERE JUST NEEDS TO BE SOME ADDED CONSIDERATION EFFECT ONGOING.
>> YES. HERE'S AN AERIAL VIEW, AND THIS IS THE THREE SIGNS UNDER CONSIDERATION TONIGHT.
THE TWO ATTACHED SIGNS ARE NUMBER 12 AND NUMBER 13, AND THEN THIS IS THE PROPOSED LOCATION OF THE MONUMENT SIGN.
WITH THEIR PREVIOUS MASTER SIGN PLAN, THEY DID GET THESE ATTACHED BUILDING SIGNS APPROVED.
THIS IS ONE OF THE EXISTING SIGNS ON THE BUILDING.
YOU CAN SEE THE SIZE, AND THEN THEY'RE JUST WANTING TO INCREASE TO THIS.
THIS IS THEIR PROPOSAL. THEN ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BUILDING, SAME THING.
THEY GOT A SMALLER SIGN APPROVED.
THEY'RE WANTING TO UPSIZE TO THIS.
THEN FOR THE OFF-SITE MONUMENT SIGN, THEY DO HAVE TWO OPTIONS.
THIS IS THEIR PREFERRED OPTION.
THE TOTAL HEIGHT OF THE SIGN IS 11.5 FEET, AND AS I MENTIONED, IT IS AN OFFSITE SIGN.
THEY DO OWN THIS PARCEL RIGHT HERE, BUT IT IS CONSIDERED OFF-SITE BECAUSE IT'S SEPARATE FROM THE HOSPITAL.
THIS IS THEIR SECOND OPTION, JUST A REDUCED SIZE 7'2" TALL.
THIS IS SIMILAR TO SOME OF THE OTHER SIGNS THAT THEY HAVE EXISTING ON THE SITE.
THEY DO HAVE ONE LARGER SIGN LIKE THIS THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED, AND THAT'S ALONG 114.
THIS IS JUST A VIEW OF WHERE THE PROPOSED MONUMENT SIGN WOULD GO, AND THEN VIEW OF THE EXISTING BUILDING SIGN 12 THAT THEY'RE WANTING TO UPSIZE AND THE EXISTING BUILDING SIGN 13.
I'M JUST SHOWING SOME OF THE OTHER MONUMENT ENTRY SIGNS THAT THEY CURRENTLY HAVE.
THIS IS THE LARGER SIGN ALONG 114.
THIS ONE HASN'T BEEN INSTALLED YET.
THIS IS SIMILAR TO THAT SECOND OPTION THAT THEY WERE SHOWING.
THERE ARE OTHER MONUMENT ENTRY SIGN THAT HASN'T BEEN INSTALLED YET, BUT THEY WILL BE 7'2".
THEN WE JUST HAVE SOME OTHER SITE PHOTOS TO RUN THROUGH REAL QUICK.
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> JUST CONFIRMING, I GUESS THE EMERGENCY ROOM SIGN, IT SAYS IT'S OFF-SITE CRITERIA THAT WE'RE HAVING TO GRANT.
[00:30:08]
THEY DO OWN THE LAND, BUT I GUESS STAFF CONSIDERS IT OFF-SITE BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ADJACENCY ETC. THAT MAKES SENSE.ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? LET US CHEW THROUGH THIS FOR A SECOND.
I'M ASSUMING YOU'RE THE APPLICANT HERE, AND WE'LL SEE WHAT WE CAN WORK TOWARDS.
THE TWO BUILDING SIGNS, I GUESS, SIGNS 12 AND 13, EAST AND WEST ELEVATIONS.
>> I THINK IT LOOKS A LOT BETTER THAN THE LARGER LAYERS.
>> WELL, THAT'S AT LEAST THREE PEOPLE.
WE'LL SEE WHERE THINGS GO FROM THERE.
OFF-SITE MONUMENT OPTIONS 1 AND 2.
>> I THINK IT JUST NEEDS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE OTHER SIGNS OTHER THAN THE 114 ONE.
STEPH, YOU PUT THE SLIDE BACK UP THAT TALKS ABOUT THE EMERGENCY CONSIDERATIONS.
LET ME JUST RE READ THIS AGAIN.
NOT THAT WE HAVE ALAN TAYLOR HERE TONIGHT, BUT I GUESS DO WE FEEL LIKE WE'RE LEGALLY OBLIGATED TO GRANT THIS OFF-SITE SIGNED?
>> JUST A DIRECT READ OF IT, I WOULD SAY YOU'RE NOT.
>> NO, WE'RE NOT BECAUSE THAT'S.
>> WE HAVE THIS PRETTY ROUNDABOUT THERE THAT WE PUT.
WE ALL SUFFERED THREE YEARS OF CONSTRUCTION WORK RIGHT THERE TO BUILD SOMETHING THAT ACTUALLY LOOKS NICE.
>> WE'RE BEING ASKED TO PUT A BILLBOARD UP THERE.
>> I GUESS I'M SYMPATHETIC, AND AGAIN, I'M ACTUALLY A PATIENT THAT VISITED THERE ONCE IN AN EMERGENCY.
>> GOOD SERVICE. I FOUND THE EMERGENCY ROOM, NO PROBLEM.
>> WELL, WE HAD THE SIGN PACKAGE COME THROUGH, AND I WAS VERY SYMPATHETIC TO THE WAY FINDING WITHIN THE SITE BECAUSE WE ALL KNOW WHERE THE HOSPITAL IS, BUT IT'S ONCE YOU GET THERE, WHERE THE HELL DO I GO? I'M IN A RUSH AND EMERGENCY.
THE WAY FINDING WAS HELPFUL, BUT I THINK I'M JUST SENSITIVE TO JUNKING UP THAT ROUNDABOUT WITH A BILLBOARD, EFFECTIVELY.
>> I AGREE, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT THAT IS A HOSPITAL.
I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY THEY WANT ANOTHER EMERGENCY SIGN BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THERE'S THAT MANY PEOPLE THAT REALIZE THAT THERE'S EMERGENCY CARE THERE.
I HEAR IT ALL THE TIME, WHICH IS STRANGE.
>> DENNIS, I HAVE A QUESTION. IF THEY RE-PLATTED THIS SO THAT THIS 1205 WAS PLATTED AS PART OF THE LARGER TRACT HERE, WOULD THEY EVEN NEED TO REQUEST?
>> IF IT WAS PART OF THEIR LOT, THEN IT WOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED OFF-SITE.
>> THEY COULD DO IT WITHOUT ANY COMING THROUGH THE SIGNBOARD?
>> WELL, IT LOOKS LIKE THEY'D STILL NEED TO.
>> I'M THINKING IT WOULD PROBABLY MEET DISTANCE SEPARATION FROM THE OTHER SIGNS ON THE SITE.
ASSUMING IT MEETS THE HEIGHT REGULATIONS, IT COULD BE PERMITTED. YES.
>> I'M MAYBE NOT INCLINED TO GRANT IT, BUT CITY COUNCIL MAY HAVE A DIFFERENT VIEWPOINT.
SEE I CAN FIND ONES I DON'T MIND.
I GUESS YOU WERE NOT INCLINED TO GRANT IT.
>> NO. I'M NOT INCLINED TO DEVOTE APPROVAL FOR BE OFF-SITE.
I UNDERSTAND, IF THEY REPLAT THIS, THEY CAN PUT IT THERE ANYWAY WITHOUT ASKING US FOR APPROVAL.
>> IF IT MET THE HIGH CRITERIA AND SET THE EXCHANGE.
[00:35:05]
>> OF OUR SIGN ORDINANCE, CORRECT.
>> YOU'RE NOT LOSING ANYTHING THERE.
YOU CAN SEE THE SIGN ORDINANCE RIGHT THERE, 6'6", FOUR FEET. THEY COULD DO THAT.
WHICH IS, IF WE APPROVE SOMETHING TONIGHT, IT PROBABLY WOULD BE NO SMALLER THAN THAT.
I DON'T THINK WE'RE REALLY LOSING ANYTHING.
WOULD YOU WANT TO COME UP AND COMMENT ON THE NAME AND ADDRESS ONCE YOU HEARD THE SENTIMENT?
>> TOM NOBLE, 3109, CLYMER DRIVE, PLANO.
>> BENSON CHACO WOULD USUALLY BE HERE, PRESIDENT OF THE HOSPITAL, IF HE'S OUT OF STATE.
I WORK WITH BENSON. I'M FROM A CORPORATE OFFICE.
I'M WORKING WITH HIM ON THE EXPANSIONS AND ALSO THE SIGNAGE.
THE THOUGHT WITH HAVING THIS AT THE ROUNDABOUT, I DON'T KNOW IF IS IT POSSIBLE TO GO BACK TO THE SLIDE? I'M SORRY.
THAT. THE THOUGHT HERE BEING THAT IF SOMEBODY'S ACCESSING THE FRONT OF THE CAMPUS OFF OF 114, YOU ALL MENTIONED IT, WE'RE TRYING TO NAVIGATE HIM AROUND PARKING LOTS AND BUILDINGS AND GET HIM BACK TO THE ED.
AT THE ROUNDABOUT, THE MOST DIRECT ROUTE TO THE ED IS IF THEY CAN MAKE IT IMMEDIATE TURN TO THE RIGHT ON HIGHLAND STREET, SO THAT WHEN THEY ACCESS THE BACK OF THE CAMPUS, THE ED IS RIGHT THERE.
THEY CAN SEE IT, AND THE POINT WOULD BE TO TRY AND GET THEM THERE QUICKER, EASIER.
IF IT'S A MINOR EMERGENCY, DO A FEW MINUTES MAKE A DIFFERENCE? PROBABLY NOT.
STROKE, HEART ATTACK, SOMEBODY'S TRYING TO DRIVE SOMEBODY TO THE HOSPITAL, THAT COULD MAKE A DIFFERENCE, PARTICULARLY IF THEY'RE UNDER STRESS.
OUR THOUGHT WAS, THIS IS JUST HELPING GET PEOPLE TO THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT FASTER.
PEOPLE KNOW THE HOSPITALS THERE.
WE'RE JUST TRYING TO MAKE IT EASIER TO GET DIRECTLY INTO THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT.
>> I'M SYMPATHETIC TO THAT, I GUESS, BUT TO ACCOMPLISH THAT, I DON'T THINK YOU NEED 7'2", AND I DON'T HONESTLY THINK YOU NEED 6'6".
IF IT WAS A MUCH SMALLER MONUMENT SIGN, I GUESS I COULD CONSIDER IT BECAUSE I GET IT, BUT, I THINK WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO IS PUT A BILLBOARD UP THERE FOR YOUR HOSPITAL ON OBI WAY, THERE'S AN EMERGENCY.
IF IT'S TRULY JUST A SMALL EMERGENCY SIGN, VERY SMALL, SMALL MEANING THREE OR FOUR FEET ON THE GROUND, SOMETHING JUST ME.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT OTHERS THINK. I COULD MAYBE GET MY ARMS AROUND THAT A LITTLE EASIER, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS IS.
THIS IS A BILLBOARD. ME PERSONALLY.
>> I TEND TO AGREE. I'M SORRY.
LIKE I SAID, I DIDN'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM FINDING IT WHEN I NEEDED IT, AND I WAS IN SEVERE PAIN AND I WAS DRIVING.
I FOUND IT AND IT'D BE GOOD TO HAVE ONE, BUT WE CAN'T HAVE A SIGN EVERYWHERE THAT WAY FINDING SIGNS.
DENNIS, IS THERE ANY CHANCE THAT THE CITY COULD IN SOME OF OUR CITY SIGNAGE THAT HAS HOSPITAL TYPE THINGS, DO WE HAVE ANYTHING IN THIS AREA THAT YOU'RE AWARE OF THAT POINTS TO THE HOSPITAL?
>> NO, WE DO NOT HAVE ANY SIGNAGE PLAN FOR THAT AT THIS TIME.
>> THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING YOU COULD LOOK INTO, THOUGH, MAYBE AS AN ADDITION TO SOME OF THE CITY SIGNAGE, HAVING THE BIG E SIGN, BUT THE NORMAL EMERGENCY HOSPITAL SIDE IN SOME OTHER AREAS NEAR THE ROUNDABOUT OR WHATEVER.
>> MAYBE WHAT WE CAN DO IS, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE TWO EAST AND WEST ELEVATION SIGNS SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE OKAY ON THOSE.
ON THIS ONE, WE CAN JUST SEE WHERE THE MOTION PLAYS OUT, AND WHAT YOU CAN DO FOR CITY COUNCIL IS YOU COULD AT YOUR OPTION BRING VARIOUS SIZES OF THIS, AND IF FOR WHATEVER REASON, WE DON'T APPROVE ANY SIGNAGE, YOU CAN STILL BRING BACK A PROPOSED ONE FOR CITY COUNCIL TO CONSIDER.
I'M JUST MAKING THINGS UP HERE, BUT IF YOU PRESENTED A THREE OR FOUR FOOT TALL ONE, AND THEY SAID, OKAY, THAT SIZE, WE'RE OKAY WITH THE OFF-SITE, JUST KNOW THAT THAT CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED AS THE PROCESS PLAYS ON.
WHATEVER COMES OUT OF THE NIGHT IS NOT A FINAL VERDICT.
YOU CAN STILL AND STAFF CAN INSTRUCTION ON.
IN FACT, YOU CAN PRESENT BOTH OF THESE OPTIONS IF YOU WANT,
[00:40:01]
OR A SCALE DOWN ONE AND JUST MAYBE GET COUNCIL'S INPUT ON THAT, BUT AT LEAST THIS WAY, ONE WAY OR ANOTHER TONIGHT, WE KEEP YOU MOVING.>> THANK YOU. CRAFTING SOMETHING UP, I GUESS, IF A MOTION WERE CRAFTED UP, THAT MAKE SURE I'LL SAY THIS CORRECTLY WITH DENNIS HERE STARING ME DOWN, VARIANCES TO SIGNS 12 AND 13, AS NOTED AND REQUESTED, BUT DENYING THE OFF-SITE SIGNS 1 AND 2 OPTIONS 1 AND 2 AS PROPOSED, HOW WOULD COMMISSIONERS FEEL ABOUT THAT ONE? ONE, TWO, GETTING HEAD NODS.
I THINK THAT ONE MIGHT END OUR MEETING HERE. NO PRESSURE.
AGAIN, THE APPLICANT, YOU CAN STILL PROPOSE THESE AT THE COUNCIL MEETING AND ADVOCATE OR BRING WHOEVER YOU WANT, ETC, AND THEY MAY HAVE A DIFFERENT VIEWPOINT.
THAT'S WHY THEY'RE THE COUNCIL MEMBERS.
CORRECT. JUST THE CHILDREN THAT TRY TO SHARPEN THE ROUGH EDGES.
>> MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM NUMBER 7, OUR SIGN BOARD AGENDA, CASE NUMBER MSP 24-0003, SUBJECT TO THE STAFF REPORT DATED AUGUST 2ND, 2024.
WE'RE APPROVING THE VARIANCES, AS NOTED FOR SIGNS 12 AND 13 ONLY, BUT DENYING OPTIONS 1 AND 2 OF THE MONUMENT SIGN OFF-SITE.
>> IN OUR MOTION, DO WE HAVE A SECOND? LET'S GIVE IT A VOTE. WOW. WE'RE GETTING BETTER AT THIS. WE GET FIVE VOTE.
GOOD LUCK AT THE NEXT MEETING, AUGUST 20TH, AND WITH THAT, THE MEETING IS ADJOURNED AT 8:50 PM.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.