Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976-09-23 11100 41) Zoning Board of Adjustment September 23, 1976 CALL TO ORDER The meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustment was called to order at 7:30 P. M. in the Council Chambers of Euless City Hall . Members present were Messrs. Bob Eden, George Winter, Jim Banks, Carroll Davis, and Lucian Holmes. Also present were Director of Public Works Jack Bullard, Director of Planning and Development Don Pfrimmer, City Inspector Garry Maples, and Recording Secretary Becky Gunter. VISITORS Visitors in attendance were Messrs. R. Fayne Childers and Jerry B. Jackson. PUBLIC HEARING - APPEAL OF MR. FAYNE CHILDERS TO HAVE A FLASHING LIGHT AT HIS PLACE OF BUSINESS, 1314 WEST EULESS BLVD. (PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF SH183, WEST OF WESTERN HILLS INN) Mr. Jim Banks was appointed Acting Chairman. Mr. Banks stated the purpose of the Public Hearing is to hear the appeal of Mr. Fayne Childers to have a flashing light at his place of business at 1314 West Euless Blvd. located in Wilshire Shopping Center. Mr. Banks called for a representative of the City to present the objections to Mr. Childers' request. Mr. Maples stated that Mr. Childers is in violation of City of Euless Ordinance No. 347, Section 9-200 which states that no flashing lights are allowed in the City of Euless. Mr. Banks asked if the sign itself without the flashing light is allowed. Mr. Maples stated it is. (Pa a Two 'in Bo rd of Adjustment Meeting, Septem ; r 2 / ) Mr. Banks asked if the sign is illuminated. Mr. Maples stated it is. Mr. Banks asked if there is a City requirement that new signs be recorded at the City. Mr. Maples stated a sign permit is required. However, there is no record of a sign permit or an electrical permit for this location. Mr. Holmes asked if the height of the sign would be a determining factor. Mr. Maples said it would not. Mr. Holmes asked if the Ordinance would have to be changed to allow Mr. Childers to keep the flashing light. Mr. Bullard stated either the Ordinance could be amended or the Zoning Board could grant a waver. Mr. Banks asked if a permit was requested when the sign was erected. Mr. Maples stated that apparently there was no request for a permit since one was not issued. Also, there is no record of an electrical permit for the wiring of the sign in June. Mr. Holmes asked what would happen if the Zoning Board granted a waver. Mr. Maples stated that he is now involved with other similar cases and if Mr. Childers is granted a waver, they also will want a waver. Mr. Eden asked if there are very many other flashing lights in the City. Mr. Maples stated there are only three at this time. Mr. Banks asked if the fact that the light is flashing is the problem. Mr. Maples stated it is. Mr. Banks asked if there were any more questions. (Page Three 'onin ward of Adjustment Meeting, Sept,.. ber 2376) Mr. Banks asked for a representative of Mr. Childers. Mr. Jackson stated he would like to clarify Mr. Childers' request. He presented copies of a photograph of the site to the Zoning Board members. Mr. Holmes asked if the intended use of the photograph was to show the flashing light. Mr. Jackson stated it was not. He further stated that after this sign was erected, the City changed the sign requirements. He also stated they are asking for limited permission to use the flashing light from 8:00 A. M. to 5:00 P. M. Monday thru Friday and from 8:30 A. M. to 12:00 P. M. on Saturdays. The physical location is 116 feet from the highway and 1 ,040 feet from the nearest intersection. Mr. Childers started his business in the fall of 1968. At that time, no new signs could be erected; to advertise, it was necessary to acquire space on an existing pole. Since 1968, Mr. Childers has spent about $2,000. in acquiring space from prior owners. In 1968 there were only three poles available for use in this area. They were the previous Fort Worth Savings sign, the pole owned by Andy Winters, and the previous Employment Service sign which is now Mr. Childers' sign. The sign requirements are now more liberal and the photograph will show how there are now more than twelve new large signs within 1 ,000 feet of Mr. Childers' sign. To convert Mr. Childers' sign to be equal with the other signs would involve moving the sign closer to the highway at an expense of about $1 ,900. The purpose of the flashing light is to bring attention to the center which is difficult to find and make giving directions easier. The original purpose of prohibiting flashing lights was traffic safety; to prevent people from being distracted by the flashing light. However, this is merely a slow revolving amber light to draw attention to the sign and make finding the complex easier. Mr. Childers is in the insurance business and the sign is necessary for advertising to be able to stay in business. The sign would not be flashing at night, it would just be illuminated. This sign is one of the few signs erected prior to the amendment of the Ordinance and all Mr. Childers is requesting is equal advertising rights. Mr. Davis asked when the flashing light was put in. Mr. Jackson stated the flashing light was put in in March, 1976, but it was not turned on until about two months later. Mr. Banks asked if a sign permit was requested at that time. Mr. Jackson stated a sign permit was not needed as the sign itself was not changed and it was already wired for electricity. (Pa a Four ` min Braard of Adjustment Meeting, Sept ,:. er 2 6) Mr. Banks asked when the original sign was erected. Mr. Jackson stated it was erected in 1968. Mr. Davis asked if the only objection to flashing lights was because of traffic safety. Mr. Bullard stated that traffic safety was the main reason. Also, the State law prohibits a flashing light to be any closer than 1 ,000 feet from an intersection. However, it would not be feasible to write an ordinance for a location, therefore all flashing lights are prohibited. Mr. Banks asked why it is now necessary for Mr. Childers to rely on advertising when it has not been necessary in the past. Mr. Jackson stated the City now allows signs to be erected that block the view of Mr. Childers' sign. Mr. Banks asked if the City would object to the sign being moved closer to the street. Mr. Bullard stated there would be a problem in moving the sign at this location as the only place it could be moved would be in the yard. It could not be moved closer to the street as it would interfere with the required number of parking spaces. Also, the sign, if moved to the front yard, would have to vary in height from nearby signs so it would not block the view of the signs. Mr. Banks asked how much of the $2,000. invested in the sign was for the flashing light. Mr. Jackson stated about $300. Mr. Eden asked if Mr. Childers was aware that he was in violation at the time the flashing light was erected. Mr. Jackson stated he was not. Mr. Davis asked if a permit was required when the flashing light was added. Mr. Bullard stated a permit was required. Mr. Holmes asked if the sign without the flasher was within the Ordinance. Mr. Maples stated it is. (Page Five,( ,ning B��,rd of Adjustment Meeting, Sept er* er 23, 6) Mr. Davis asked how high the sign is. Mr. Childers stated it is approximately twenty feet high and is in three sections. The two cross arms are about forty inches wide by about sixty inches long and the marque sign is about thirty inches wide by about forty-eight inches long. Mr. Davis asked how high the Pizza Inn sign is. Mr. Maples stated he does not know, but he could look it up later. Mr. Jackson stated that based on the photograph, it is considerably higher. Mr. Winter asked if this light would truly be described as a flashing light since it is more of a revolving beacon. Mr. Bullard stated that it would be described as a beacon. Mr. Maples stated that any flashing or moving light is prohibited. Mr. Banks asked if there were any more questions. Mr. Banks asked Mr. Maples if he had any further statements. Mr. Maples stated that Mr. Jackson brought out the fact that a permit was not required. However, he evidently did not know this as he did not come into the office or he would have known that a flashing light is not allowed. Mr. Winter asked if there were any color restrictions. Mr. Maples stated there were none. Mr. Holmes asked if the sign is on private property since it is 116 feet from the highway. If so, does the City prohibit flashing lights on private property. Mr. Maples stated it is on private property but it is still prohibited. Mr. Eden asked what the possibility would be of amending the ordinance to only prohibit flashing lights within 100 feet of the street. • (Page Six, in Bo rd of Adjustment Meeting, Septemh- r 2 ) Mr. Bullard stated the Sign Ordinance has been in the process of being amended for about three years now, but the latest amendments were stronger against flashing lights and described them more clearly by calling them beacons, strobes, and flashing lights, and we do not believe they will allow flashing lights. Mr. Holmes asked if flashing lights inside a building are prohibited. Mr. Bullard stated that a flashing light is allowed inside a building if it is not visible from the street. Mr. Banks asked who were in favor of granting the waver. There were none. Mr. Banks asked who were against granting the waver. Those against granting the waver are as follows: Messrs. Eden, Winter, Banks, Davis, and Holmes. Mr. Childers was denied permission to have a flashing light at his place of business. II . ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:30 P. M. APPROVED: Chairman