Item 10BCity of Southlake
Department of Planning
STAFF REPORT
March 9, 2005
CASE NO: SP 05 -066
PROJECT: Sign Variance for Flagstaff Court
REQUEST: Variance to the Sign Ordinance No. 704 -B requirements for number of signs. The
development is located on the west side of N. Carroll Avenue just north of the
intersection of N. Carroll Avenue and Federal Way. This is a variance to allow an
attached sign on N. Carroll Avenue for building tenants that do not have frontage on
N. Carroll Avenue. One attached sign is permitted per tenant per street frontage. The
specific variance would allow two additional signs on two buildings fronting N.
Carroll Avenue and is as follows:
Sign Reg. Permitted Requested
Number of Signs 1 sign per street frontage 3 signs
ACTION NEEDED: Consider Sign Variance Request.
ATTACHMENTS: (A) Background Information
(B) Vicinity Map
(C) Site Plan
(D) Building Elevation & Sign Detail
(E) Sign Variance Application
STAFF CONTACT: Dennis Killough (481 -2073)
Ken Baker (481 -2036)
Case No.
SP 05 -066
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
OWNER/APPLICANT: Flagstaff Partners, L.P.
PROPERTY SITUATION: Flagstaff Court is located on the west side of N. Carroll Avenue just north of
the intersection of N. Carroll Avenue and Federal Way. There are three
buildings that make up the development. The building addresses are 410,
420, and 430 N. Carroll Avenue.
REQUEST: Flagstaff Court is requesting a variance from the number of signs to allow
signage on the front facing N. Carroll Avenue for each tenant with a store
front facing the interior of the development only.
STAFF COMMENTS: The sign criteria, building elevations, site plan and applications are attached
to this report. The following variances to the Sign Ordinance No. 704 -B are
requested:
• Ord. 704 -13, Section 16.A.4 NUMBER OF SIGNS Only one attached
sign per lease space shall be allowed along each street frontage on any
site, unless otherwise specifically provided in this ordinance.
The applicant is requesting a sign be allowed on the front facing N.
Carroll Avenue for each tenant with a store front facing the interior of
the development only. This will make a total of 3 signs on the front of the
two end buildings facing N. Carroll Avenue.
The City Council may authorize variances in accordance with the following
provision of the Sign Ordinance No. 704 -13, Section 14, Variances:
The City Council may authorize variances to any restriction set forth in this
ordinance, including but not limited to the number, type, area, height, or
setback of signs, or any other aspect involved in the sign permitting process.
In granting any variance, the City Council shall determine that a literal
enforcement of the sign regulations will create an unnecessary hardship or a
practical difficulty on the applicant, that the situation causing the
unnecessary hardship or practical difficulty is unique to the affected property
and is not self - imposed, that the variance will not injure and will be wholly
compatible with the use and permitted development of adjacent properties,
and that the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the spirit and
purpose of this sign ordinance. A person may request a variance from the
Sign Ordinance by filing the request with the Building Official. Any request
for variance shall be accompanied by a completed application and a non-
refundable filing fee in the amount specified in the current fee schedule
adopted by City Council.
Case No. Attachment A
SP05 -066 Page 1
City Council
Action: Consider sign variance request.
N: \Coimuunity Development \MEMO \SIGNS \2005 \SP05 -066 Flagstaff Court. doe
Case No.
SP05 -066
Attachment A
Page 2
Vicinity Map
Flagstaff Court
I
I'll
W
Is
Case No. Attachment B
SP 05 -066 Page 1
1000 0 1000 2000 3000 Feet
b �
o�
00
r�
1"r
A
b �
Q �
I
I �
�I
z
�I
i � r
V
�d Ir1�y1
Cl 4k76- VIf:
t o
7-
11 �a 1'T E - Z F'1
rcw
PANORMA °LAG
LARROL AVVMC
TARRANT C.OU"
O ER. PANORAMA. PROMM
g02 N. 6ARROLL AV
irie a
Pd ICMT PANORAMA FROKR'
9¢� N.N. �ARRW.I
YOLI�� AI� 77Ge .IbA- ti
y
m
m
u" tn
zl
UL
d-A
ig
i
Z Ci
R � n �
PHASE 2
9WM` A1LG, tE%A9
: '��an- -0AAaan
I�9, fNG,
' lbD9]
rkfc>t. D!Y- �aa•i7$19
a�
�b
o�
M— l 1
b �
o�
00
Letter Height
Building Width
Maximum Allowed Area
Requested Sign area
(Area inside hrick'Sox" dotall)
A
b
f
fQ
A�
A
b �
QQ �
H+ t
�
B
Letter Haig ht 6' minimum, 12" maximum
6" minimum, 12" maximum
Lefler Height
0" minimum, 12" maximum
Building Width 15'
15•
Building Width
15' 0'
11.25 S.F. ( 0.75x15.5)
Maximum Adkrr+ed Area 12 S.F. {0.75x16]
12 S.F. (03506)
maximum Alla med Area
Requested Sign area 9 S.F. ( S' x D')
9 S.F. ( 1' x 9')
Requested Sign area
11 S.F. { 2 Y.55)
(Area inside hock "B.oa' detaiq
b
f
fQ
A�
A
b �
QQ �
H+ t
19 I
iy
FEB 22 2005
Ile
Case No. Attachment D
SP 05-066 Page 2
FA5TSIGNS
CORPORAW
Existing Signs
Case No. Attachment D
SP 05 -066 Page 3
Case No. Attachment D
SP 05 -066 Page 4
Sign Variance Application
Sign Variance Application Attachment
Answers to G °Demonstration" portion of application.
Flagstaff Court consists of three buildings whose addresses are 410, 420, and 430 North Carroll
Ave. The variance requested only pertains to suites 110, 120, 180, and 190 at Flagstaff Court.
Signage on 420 N. Carroll meets the sign ordinance (see attached site plan for building layout).
Each of these buildings consists of three office suites. Historically our tenants have been granted
sign permits to attach signage to the portions of the buildings facing Carroll for suites 110, 120,
180, and 190. When the most recent tenant (Suite 190) applied for a sign permit to place signage
on the building in "Location C ", they were denied, and it was brought to our attention that the
ordinance does not allow for signage on the building if it is not attached to a portion of the
building physically occupied by the tenant. This literal enforcement of the sign regulation
creates an unnecessary hardship for tenants located in the suites mentioned above whose
business needs to be visible in order for their clients to easily identify their location.
When the site was conceptualized, a conscious decision was made to develop the site in a way
that would create an attractive streetscape. We did so by placing the buildings in a "C- Shape" at
the front of the site in order to hide the parking lot from Carroll Avenue. Had we developed the
site with the parking area adjacent to Carroll Ave., and the "C- Shape" was flipped over, then
every suite would be visible from Carroll Ave., and would be allowed by the ordinance to have
building attached signage easily visible from the street. As a result, our effort to create a nicer
streetscape penalizes tenant's ability to have signage.
The suites for which the variance is requested are not visible from Carroll Ave. The buildings
were originally designed with brick detail on the Carroll Avenue facing elevations in order to
accommodate signage in a low key, non- obtrusive, and attractive fashion.
There are currently a total of three signs on the buildings (see attached photos). The photos show
conceptually what the buildings would look like with the maximum requested signage. Our
maximum letter height would be 12" and our maximum allowed area for each sign is
significantly less than what would be allowed by the sign ordinance (see attached building
rendering and calculations).
Flagstaff' Court does not have a Monument Sign. Such a sign could be built per the ordinance
and it could consist of fifty (50) square feet per side, totaling 100 square feet of signage in
addition to what is currently allowed to be installed on the buildings. The property owners have
intentionally not built a monument sign because it would add visual clutter to Carroll Ave and
the project. Our understanding is that the spirit of the sign ordinance is to minimize such visual
clutter and maximize the attractiveness of city streetscapes. Our requested variance would add a
maximum of thirty six (36) square feet to the signage already allowed to be installed on the
buildings. If the variance is granted, the property owners are willing to give up the right to
install monument signage on the site as long as there are signs attached to the buildings which
exceed the ordinance.
Granting the variance will have no effect on adjacent properties. It would actually benefit
adjacent properties in that the lack of a monument sign at Flagstaff Court makes the adjacent
properties more visible from Carroll Avenue and makes Carroll Avenue a more attractive
thoroughfare.
Case No. Attachment E
SP 05 -066 Page 1