22 replies to this topic

[John T Roberts]

I would also like to hear from those who feel the current sign ordinance is too restrictive. Why should the ordinance be relaxed. I think this is a golded opportunity for all of us to express our views on signs. If you are for the proposed changes, let's hear those reasons, as well.

[Fort Worthology]

I'm not exactly sure how it relates to this new ordinance proposal, but I really miss the golden age of signage. What happened to downtown streets with gorgeous neon signs handing off each storefront, advertising in sleek and beautiful typefaces everything from the name of the store to the simple concept of "EAT?" I miss that in our downtown today - other than a few exceptions, our downtown (and most other cities') are woefully lacking in those classic old signs. The Ranch, the "Juvenile Shoes" sign, the Razoo's sign, the Peters Brother's sign, and that old Loans sign near to it should be the rule, not the exceptions.

Sorry for the rant - just wish we had something more akin to the locales of the past in sites such as this (James Lileks's great "Bygone Signage" site).

[Buck]

We need a section providing a historical protection for old, spectacular neon signs.

(If there are any left.)

[Fort Worthology]

Those old signs gave downtowns such a wonderful jumbled density - I wish we'd allow that type of sign to thrive once more.

[John T Roberts]

We need a section providing a historical protection for old, spectacular neon signs.

(If there are any left.)

Buck, I agree with you on this one. There are several old motel signs that are pretty neat along the route of old US 80 (Camp Bowie West).

In case if any of you are interested, under the current sign ordinances, all of the old signs that were in downtown would now not be permitted if built new. That isn't to say that variances won't be granted to permit large signs. Look at the "Park" sign on the 3rd Street Garage -- it is one of my favorite new signs, and several variances had to be granted to erect it.

The current agenda for the Downtown Design Review Board has several signs on its agenda for approval this month. They meet at 8:30 AM on the second Thursday of each month in the Pre-Council Chamber at City Hall. April's meeting is on the 13th.

[John T Roberts]

Greg, speaking of downtown signage: several projects with new signs are up for review with the Downtown Design Review Board this month. I have posted the full agenda in the Calendar, but this might be a good place for it, as well.

AGENDA
DOWNTOWN DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
THURSDAY, APRIL 13, 2006
PRE-COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL 2ND FLOOR
1000 THROCKMORTON

I. PUBLIC HEARING Pre-Council Chambers 8:30 A.M.

Call To Order: Statement of Open Meetings Act

BOARD MEMBERS

J. D. Granger
Place 1 ____ Ames Fender
Place 4 ____

Raymond O’Connor
Place 2/ Chair ____ Kenneth Moczulski
Place 5 ____

William V. Boecker
Place 3/ Vice Chair ____ Elizabeth Falconer
Alternate ____

APPROVED DENIED
____ ____


A. ANNOUNCEMENTS

B. APPROVAL OF THE MARCH 13 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES

C. NEW CASES

II. ADJOURNMENT

III. DISCUSSION ITEMS

A. CONVENTION CENTER HOTEL
B. CITY PARKING GARAGE
C. CITY PLACE II - 100 THROCKMORTON
D. REVISIONS TO THE RULES OF PROCEDURE
E. DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE STAFF REVIEW OF CERTAIN ITEMS IN THE DOWNTOWN URBAN DESIGN STANDARDS

Meeting Accessibility
This facility is wheelchair accessible. For accommodations or sign interpretive services,
Please call the Planning Department at 392-8000 at least 48 hours in advance.
Executive Session.
A closed executive session may be held with respect to any posted agenda item to enable the Commission to receive advice from legal counsel, pursuant to Texas Government Code, Section 551.071.


APPROVED DENIED CONTINUE
____ ____ ____
____ ____ ____



C. NEW CASES

DG06-24 450 Throckmorton (420 Throckmorton Street), Taverna
Owner/ Applicant: Sundance Square, Inc./ Taverna Fort Worth LLC

Requests a Certificate of Appropriateness to install an 8’ x 2' double-sided illuminated projecting sign to the southeast corner of the Chase Bank Building reading TAVERNA vertically with “Pizzaria” and Risotteria” below.


DG06-25 815 Main Street, Hilton Hotel
Owner/ Applicant: Remington Hotel Corporation /Chandler Signs

Requests a Certificate of Appropriateness to:
1. One set of LED illuminated channel letters with red faces reading "Hilton" on the south hi-rise elevation. The letter "H" is 10'-0" and the word "Hilton" stretches out 46'-8"; and
2. One LED illuminated channel logo with red face on the east hi-rise elevation. The logo is 10'-3" high and 14'-10" wide.
3. Paint white existing roof structure to match decorative trim. Signs will be attached to existing roof structure on top of the building.



APPROVED DENIED CONTINUE
____ ____ ____

____ ____ ____

____ ____ ____

DG06-26 221 West Lancaster Avenue, Texas & Pacific Lofts
Owner/ Applicant: Alta Renaissance LP. /Womack + Hampton Architects

Requests a Certificate of Appropriateness to:
1. One temporary 20’x20’ vinyl banner on the east façade of the T&P Building for a period of twelve months;
2. Two temporary 4’x8’ moveable marketing signs for a period of twelve months;
3. Two temporary 18’’x24’’ moveable directional signs for a period of twelve months;
4. A back-lit reverse channel letters wall sign on the north façade of the T&P Building, to the west of the existing main entrance and above the doors leading to the new Sales Manager’s Office;
5. Two aluminum, art deco, wall sconces on the north façade of the T&P Building, on each side of the Sales Office entry;
6. A 17”x18” wall mounted sales center sign, which indicates hours of operation, on the north façade of the T&P Building, on east side of the doors leading to the new Sales Manager’s Office.; and
7. Install an internally illuminated aluminum push acrylic letters sign along the top edge of the new low-rise apartment building entry canopy.


DG06-27 115 West 3rd Street, KTFW 92.1
Owner/ Applicant: Sundance Square, Inc./Andy Meadows, LKCM Radio Group


Requests a Certificate of Appropriateness to install a 9' x 13' x 12" freestanding, skeletal style, multi colored neon projecting sign, at a forty five degree angle, to the northwest corner of the Jett Building located at 115 West 3rd Street.


DG06-28 112 Main Street, First Horizon Financial Center
Owner/ Applicant: Jerry J. Loftin / Looney Ricks Kiss Architects, Joe Bucher

Requests a Certificate of Appropriateness to add a drive-through banking system, which consists of three drive lanes and a canopy structure attached to the building.


APPROVED DENIED CONTINUE
____ ____ ____
____ ____ ____
____ ____ ____
____ ____ ____


DG06-29 116 North Elm Street, Allen Chapel
Owner/ Applicant:

Requests a Certificate of Appropriateness to install a 90” tall two-sided, internally illuminated, metal mounted monument sign with a cast-stone pedestal in the church parking lot. Metal painted black or a color to match wrought iron railing on church.


II. ADJOURNMENT OF PUBLIC HEARING

III. DISCUSSION ITEMS

A. CONVENTION CENTER HOTEL - A 600 ROOM CONVENTION HOTEL WITH 40,000 SQUARE FEET MEETING SPACE, GROUND FLOOR RESTAURANTS AND RETAIL; 97 CONDOMINIUM UNITS; AND 3 LEVELS OF UNDERGROUND PARKING. PROJECT LOCATED ON TWO CITY-OWNED SURFACE PARKING LOTS IMMEDIATELY WEST OF THE CONVENTION CENTER.

B. CITY PARKING GARAGE

C. CITY PLACE II - ITEMS RELATED TO THE LOWER PORTION OF THE TOWER AND THE TOP FEATURE.

D. REVISIONS TO THE RULES OF PROCEDURE

E. DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE STAFF REVIEW OF CERTAIN ITEMS IN THE DOWNTOWN URBAN DESIGN STANDARDS

[safly]

Good to know. I may need to be looking into this RBoard pretty soon.

[Fort Worthology]

In case if any of you are interested, under the current sign ordinances, all of the old signs that were in downtown would now not be permitted if built new.

Why is that? What's the reasoning there?

Just curious - and genuinely ignorant of it.

[John T Roberts]

Atomic, it's hard to explain, because I'm certainly not a Fort Worth Ordinance historian. From what I can remember, is that the old style large signs have just been gradually legislated out of existence.

If any of you are wondering why I haven't voted in my own poll, I didn't allow for my choice of my opinion. I feel that we should overhaul our sign ordinance and make some parts of it more restrictive and other parts of it less restrictive.

[John T Roberts]

Proposal calls for sign regulations
By MIKE LEE
Star-Telegram Staff Writer

FORT WORTH - Commercial signs in the city could face new height, size and style restrictions under a proposal that could pit some business owners against neighborhood groups.

The City Council is set to begin discussions today on the proposed changes to the city's sign ordinance, which would regulate some types of signs, such as those in store windows, for the first time.

Most new business signs would be smaller under the proposal, and temporary signs would require permits. Time limits would be imposed on how long businesses could use banners and other types of temporary signs.

The proposal is also designed to encourage the use of monument-style signs; it places height and style restrictions on pole and freeway signs.

Neighborhood groups applauded the proposals from a local advisory committee, saying they would decrease pollution and eliminate the visual clutter caused by the forest of pole-mounted signs that line some of Fort Worth's commercial corridors.

"We feel this is written for the neighborhoods, which is a plus," said Matthew Hudson, president of the Fort Worth League of Neighborhood Associations.

Business groups, particularly temporary sign companies, are concerned that the changes would cut into their profits.

Most existing signs would be protected by grandfather clauses in state law and the city zoning ordinance, city Development Director Bob Riley said. The city can't force owners to remove them without compensation.

Owners of temporary signs would be those most immediately affected. The proposed limits would limit the amount of time that a business could display a temporary sign by 75 percent, said Stacey Taylor, owner of American Portable Signs.

Hudson said some businesses use temporary signs to get around the restrictions on permanent signs, though.

He also said the rules on other types of signs would help level the playing field, so that businesses are not forced to buy bigger signs to compete for potential customers.

The ordinance mimics the types of requirements that are becoming more popular around the country. Many of the other requirements, such as the use of monument signs, are in place at newer developments.

A citizens committee made up of business owners, neighborhood representatives and City Council members has been working on the proposal for months. A City Council committee voted in favor of the proposal on March 21. A vote by the full council could come in the next few weeks.

IN THE KNOW

Proposed sign regulations

The Fort Worth City Council is considering proposed regulations that would limit the size, height and style of business signs in the city.

Attached signs could be no larger than 10 percent of a building's front facade and no wider than 75 percent of the building's width.

Monument signs could be a maximum of 8 feet high, with at least 75 percent or more of the structure's width in contact with the ground.

Pylon signs could be a maximum 25 feet high, with 50 percent or more of the structure's width in contact with the ground.

Freeway signs could have a maximum height of 30 feet, but could be raised to 50 feet if necessary to be visible from adjacent freeway lanes. At least 25 percent of the sign's width must be in contact with the ground.

Banners and portable signs could be no larger than 60 square feet and could be used only twice a year for up to 30 days.

Window signs would be regulated for the first time and could not exceed 10 percent of the window area.

SOURCE: City of Fort Worth

[John T Roberts]

In trying to edit the poll, I have really messed this thread up. My first post is now the one above, and all of the old votes have been deleted. Please vote again.

[Fort Worthology]

Atomic, it's hard to explain, because I'm certainly not a Fort Worth Ordinance historian. From what I can remember, is that the old style large signs have just been gradually legislated out of existence.

Odd. I wonder what the reasoning behind that was, over time. Were the big signs thought unsafe? Did the '70s try to erase them for fear of ruining their sleek, modern concrete boxes? It's just peculiar, is all.

[redhead]

I think there were a couple of thoughts that engendered this. First there have been numerous infractions involving banner type signs---staying up so long that they are frayed, faded or tattered, adding to visual pollution. There have aslo been a number of instances where they have "broken loose" and that has caused safety concerns.
Finally, for those of you who have spent any time in Europe, I think it is finally catching on here in the states just how nice it looks in an urban area without all of the gargantuan signs---especially billboards. (sorry, safly) That's just my interprtation of the city staff's intent.

[Fort Worthology]

Finally, for those of you who have spent any time in Europe, I think it is finally catching on here in the states just how nice it looks in an urban area without all of the gargantuan signs---especially billboards. (sorry, safly) That's just my interprtation of the city staff's intent.

Which "gargantuan signs" are we talking about, though? Because I'd be thrilled if downtown had a lot more signs like, say, the Peters Brother's Hats sign, or the Ranch sign, or the like.

[RD Milhollin]

Does anyone know of an online source to look at the proposed ordinance? The Haltom City P&Z has been working on a similar ordinance for several months and I would be interested in comparing points from both.

[John T Roberts]

I don't know if the proposed ordinance is online, but the existing one can be found on the city's web site.

[redhead]

Someone on the committee sent me a copy but I did not save it. I'm sure we can get it through staff...

And Atomic, the city actually encourages the very type of signage you listed. If you read the Downtown Design Guideslines, those are the kind of signs it promotes---not box signs or pole signs, but signs of character and distinction. The proposed changes would not affect those signs at all.

[redzeep]

Finally, for those of you who have spent any time in Europe, I think it is finally catching on here in the states just how nice it looks in an urban area without all of the gargantuan signs---especially billboards. (sorry, safly) That's just my interprtation of the city staff's intent.

Which "gargantuan signs" are we talking about, though? Because I'd be thrilled if downtown had a lot more signs like, say, the Peters Brother's Hats sign, or the Ranch sign, or the like.

I like the Peters Brother's Hats sign and the Ranch style signs.

HATE the freeway signs!

Speaking of signs .... I know that Clear Channel has taken over the directional signage for Mansfield and now Midlothian .... are they approaching Fort Worth as well?

[AndyN]

Here's your chance to say something about the proposed sign ordinance amendments.

The City of Fort Worth Sign Code Citizen Advisory Committee invites you to a briefing on the proposed amendments to the sign ordinance to be held on:

Wednesday, September 5, 2007
6:00 p.m.
Central Library, Tandy Lecture Hall
500 West 3rd Street, Downtown Fort Worth

The City of Fort Worth has reconvened the Sign Code Citizen Advisory Committee in order to complete the work begun in 2005. The Committee would like to receive public comments on the proposed sign amendments before finalizing its recommendations to the City Council.


Agenda

Welcome and Overview - Council members Wendy Davis, Chair, and Jungus Jordan
Review of Proposed Amendments - Dana Burghdoff, Deputy Director, Planning and Development Department
Questions and Answers
Adjournment
Types of Signs Affected

Political signs
Temporary/portable signs
Window signs
Attached signs
Detached signs
Changeable copy signs
Developer and homebuilder signs
Sales office/model home signs
Unified sign agreements
Summary of Significant Changes

The proposed amendments include significant changes, including the following:

Reduced size and height of most sign types.
New homebuilder kiosk program to replace current homebuilder, developer, and subdivision directional signs.
Administrative approval of unified sign agreements that meet ordinance requirements.
Permits required for temporary portable signs and banners and reduced permitted display time.
For more information on the proposed sign amendments, please visit
www.fortworthgov.org/planninganddevelopment or contact Marolee Lunsford at 817-392-8481 or Marolee.Lunsford@fortworthgov.org.