HomeMy WebLinkAboutC.054.93011_0515 (2)asked for guidance pertaining to a sign erected in front of the fire department that was in
violation of the county's zoning ordinance. Robinson said the firemen were unaware
that a permit was needed for the sign. He said the planning department had informed
him the sign (described as a marquee along with a built-in mailbox) was nine feet too
close to the road, and there was a safety issue. Robinson said Overcash Electric, P.S.
West Construction, and officials with the Town of Mooresville were all familiar with
the new VFD building, but no one had mentioned a permit or any regulations for signs.
He said the planning department had indicated the sign would be permissible with the
elimination of the marquee, but the fire department didn't have relocation funds. Chief
Robinson said the sign's brick and mortar costs were approximately $1,800.00, and it
would probably cost $6,000 to $10,000 to re',ocate the sign. He said the sign had a
footing, and it wasn't just a matter of "picking it up and moving it."
Robinson continued by saying the department now had fines between $4,000.00
and $5,000.00, and the matter had been appealed to the Board of Adjustment twice. He
acknowledged that at one Board of Adjustment meeting, a representative from the VFD
was not in attendance, and a person in the community voiced objections about the sign.
(Information provided by the Planning & Enforcement Office indicated that in
accordance with the General Statutes [§153A -345(e)], appeals of any Board of
Adjustment decision are to be made to Superior Court.)
Planning & Code Enforcement Director Niblock said options were limited to
the commissioners unless there was approval of a zoning ordinance amendment.
Additional information from Niblock's office provided the following timeline regarding
the sign:
October 31, 2003 — VFD notified by phone and mail that a problem existed.
November 14, 2003 — County Planners Rebecca Harper & Whitney Hodges
visit the VFD site and talk to Jamie Barrier, the Asst.
VFD Chief. The violation was explained, along with the process to seek
a variance.
May 20, 2004 — Iredell County Board of Adjustment meets to consider a request from the
VFD for a variance. No one from the VFD attends. The Board of
Adjustment denies the request due to determining the department "did not
meet any of the findings required" for variance approval.
May 27, 2004 — VFD notified by mail about the denial. (At that point in time,
the VFD had 30 days to appeal to Superior Court.)
August 2, 2004 — Due to VFD not removing the sign or seeking relief from the
courts, the VFD was notified by mail that should "new evidence" be
found another Board of Adjustment hearing could be scheduled. If not,
the sign needed to be removed.
September 29, 2004 - $100 -a -day zoning citation issued.
October 8, 2004 - $800-aday zoning citation issued.
November 17, 2004 - VFD submits a rehearing request to Board of Adjustment.
November 18, 2004 - Board of Adjustment reviews and denies the case due to
"finding no new evidence."
Robinson said the sign and mailbox were on the same side of the road, and he
felt the arrangement made the area safer for everyone. He said the county's building
inspectors had inspected and signed off on the new VFD building, and he felt the
situation was a misunderstanding.
Commissioner Johnson said the VFD had a building permit -- not a sign permit.
Johnson said he also felt there was a misunderstanding regarding the sign. Mr. Johnson
asked if it would be permissible for the board of commissioners to write a letter to the
board of adjustment regarding the matter.
Niblock said a letter would be acceptable under the Board of Adjustment's
Rules of Procedure; however, new evidence -- nothing already presented -- needed to
be provided. He said the board of adjustment wasn't supposed to hear the case again
until new evidence surfaced.