Board of Zoning Appeals - Regular Meeting

all right we'll call to order the January 14th 2025 Springfield Board of zoning appeals meeting and we'll start with the Pledge of [Music] Allegiance pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible liberty and justice for all all right roll call here Simmons here here shiron here here all present we have a forum all right our next item is approval of the minutes from uh the meeting on November 12th is there a motion to approve I make a motion I second motion and second all those in favor I I any oppos okay minutes pass next item is 1.4 public comment period I'm not seeing anyone from the public um so we'll close the the public comment period um we'll begin new business with item 2.1 which is discuss and possibly take action on a variance request for wall signage exceeding the allowable square footage at 3422 Tom Austin Highway is there a motion to put this on the floor so move I second all right staff thank you Mr chairman this is a the applicant is requesting a variance

to increase the wall signage allowance for their property um this property is Zone Commercial Services uh the current regulations for wall signage um for General commercial zones allows for a maximum of 75 Square ft the applicant initially received staff approval for 70 square ft of wall AG however they are requesting two additional wall signs um bringing the total wall sign um to 142 Square ft um exceeding the maximum allowable according to the Springfield zoning ordinance uh this board does not have jurisdiction to approve a variance that exceeds the established sign ordinance um granting this request would not only be outside your scope uh but would also conflict with the ordinance and set a precedent for Sim similar future request um staff recommends denial of this varant request for two reasons one the applicant has not demonstrated hardship as required by the zoning ordinance um and two the request does not meet the nine standards for the variance nor does it present any gray area to enforcing the regulations set by the board of Mayor [Applause] Alderman we also have uh the applicant Ross MacArthur um joining us by phone and he is here to provide his uh reasoning for this request Mr MC do you want to chime in can you hear me yes I can okay they asked for um your your comments about increasing the okay um Lord thank you for hearing me I apologize for not being in there in person we had some ISU with our flight being delayed um my name isur I'm from uh 321 El Lane in the

Eastville Virginia uh I'm here on behalf of Panda Express asking for that uh facing the sou elevation um we are asking uh for several reasons one is the advanced tree growth to the South block sine to the to the restaurant um and the speed of the roadway which is 55 it does have a center for left hand turn but as you come up the roadway there it he can still pass that location before you even see the the rest uh I would also note that chickfila has three wall signs on their building um and and they have a set of Lights in front of them that we slow down traffic and uh allow Peng to get a good view of the sight lines to the driveways and entrances and exit to that uh we're asking for favorable um for those [Music] [Applause] okay are there questions from those on the committee yeah I can go ahead and comment on Chick-fil-A um so they have two uh front front edges and so they're allowable sign edges um more I have a question he talking about the the trees being blocked is any way that you know without removing the trees any way you can trim the trees up where

they can see through the signs see the sign that that he's got would meet the Rings they're able to what trees are they Ross right here you got a picture right here [Music] and did I hear him mention that the speed limit was 55 it's just 40 to my know on Tom Austin how get that so Candace this may be a question for you so this is just wall signage right it's not they still have uh standard signs pole signs um and then other signs around the property yes okay in that diagram in the site plan there pull signage Mark number 10 and 11 that are closer to the street yep those are already approved I have a question could he right now could he make one big wall sign to to meet the specs um so that is up to them that they just cannot go over the allowable 75 squ F feet so yeah um we would if he would want to amend his application that we have already approved um because that original application I think only had 70 um square feet they he could absolutely amend it to do the 75 and fit that however he'd like on that those building or that those

walls I was just say I have concern I guess the president that's what's at Beyond this one particular case uh with them not meeting the the criteria and it seems like the other sign is would definitely um gain drivers attention as they're driving past so I imagine this is further set back but they're seeing signs closer to the street so I I just have concern of allowing this one I agree the the the Judgment as to how observable it is is somewhat specious but there's nothing in particular about this land that gives it a unique problem are those trees owned by the next property okay I don't know the signs he got out the the signs next to the road after the road are they maxed out to the rags they met all the requirements for those SIDS he could make them bigger right um I'd have to go back and look at that application but we would allow that I mean as long as it meets regulations we would approve that yeah good question that might be one option he make the sign out next to the bigger to meet the regulations and then make the others meet the specs is there a motion one way or the other concern was there were like five criteria not m that or n that was concern 9

12 correct I make a motion to approve sure what was another option y'all you said I'm not sure if it's an option or not this would be your if we he went back and could he make the sides next to the road you know bigger it didn't meet the SPS I'm not sure if he he may already meet the regulations as far as the signage um allowance for the poll signs um as long as he meets the sign age uh regulations we would we would approve that I make a motion to approve okay is there a second give a second I'll was seconding it okay any discussion on the motion to approve okay call it's still five that PR not met out of nine that may not and maybe he can fix that I don't know call yes no Simmons No W no shro noer no the motion fails all right fair enough would you be able to send me an email to that effect have a chance yes we can we can take care of that excellent I appreciate it thank you very much one hey one other thing I know for for these we usually have to provide a reason for disapproval so uh would be just want to

put in the record that the reason is it's not meeting the criteria of our standards okay all right so motion fails um is there any other or old business all right say that is our motion to adjourn second okay we'll adjourn we just we skip it off thank you