Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Signage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves two multi‑tenant pole signs at Victory Shops, requires removal of an existing corner sign
Summary
After a unanimous sign‑control-board recommendation, Richardson City Council approved a variance to allow two multi‑tenant pole signs at Victory Shops and required removal of an existing single‑tenant sign at 1610 E. Beltline Road.
Richardson City Council approved a request from property owner Victory Shops to allow two multi‑tenant pole signs on the combined property at 1600 and 1700 East Beltline Road, and attached a condition requiring removal of an existing single‑tenant pole sign at 1610 East Beltline Road.
The sign‑control board had previously voted 5‑0 to recommend approval. At the council meeting, planning staff recapped the request and said the project required a variance because city code permits a single single‑tenant pole sign by right on sites under 10 acres; the applicant sought multi‑tenant signage to direct motorists to buildings set back from Belt Line Road.
Applicant representatives said they have completed façade work in the rear of the property and that the parcel configuration and building set‑backs make it difficult for motorists to see tenants without additional signage. The proposal presented to council showed two matching multi‑tenant pole signs (20 feet tall, 60 square feet of sign face) flanking the development; the owner said they planned to replat to bundle the properties’ parcels for consistent identification.
Several council members said they preferred the “bookend” approach (two flanking multi‑tenant signs) and expressed concern about additional sign clutter at the corner. Councilmember Doran proposed eliminating the existing middle sign and using the two new signs; the applicant said they would remove the 1610 East Beltline sign if council required that as a condition of approval. The motion approved by council required removal of the existing Callisto sign at 1610 East Beltline as a condition of the variance approval.
The council vote was 6–1 (Council Member Justice opposed). Staff advised that some existing pole signs are legal nonconforming because they predate the 2012 sign ordinance; those nonconforming signs may be refaced but cannot be structurally reconstructed without losing nonconforming status.
Ending — Council approved the variance with the condition that the existing single‑tenant sign at 1610 East Beltline be removed; staff will coordinate the removal and record‑keeping and proceed with the multi‑tenant sign permits following typical building and sign‑permit processes.
