Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Signage Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Paulding County approves wall-mounted Starbucks logo for site that faces shared parking lot
Summary
A Paulding County hearing approved a request by Hilton Displays, on behalf of Starbucks, to install a five-foot illuminated logo on a wall that faces a shared parking lot rather than a public road. Board members said the sign will mark the store entrance; details on illumination wattage and installation timing were not specified.
Paulding County board members voted to approve a request to allow a wall-mounted Starbucks logo on the side of the store at 125 Hillside Drive that faces a shared parking lot rather than a public road.
The request, presented by Joe Hall of Hilton Displays, sought permission for a five-foot logo on the east side of the building that the applicant said marks the store’s main entrance and parking area; the county’s sign rules generally bar wall signs that do not face public roads. The board moved to approve the application and recorded aye votes with no opposition noted in the transcript.
The issue mattered because the building’s primary entrance faces a large parking lot and not a public road, and the county’s sign regulations require signs to face public roads. Allowing the sign lets the business better mark its entrance for customers while the board recorded no public opposition during the hearing.
Joe Hall, with Hilton Displays, told the board, “we're the signage vendor for Starbucks, and they're just looking to add a 5 foot logo on the east side that is facing the parking lot that they share with Stars and Stripes, that is their main entrance, so that sign would delineate the entrance and also the main parking area for that sign.” He said the proposed sign would match the existing signs on the other sides of the building and “it also doesn't face any residential area. It wouldn't be lighting up any houses, but it is needed for customers in that parking lot.”
Board members asked whether the sign was illuminated. An unnamed board member asked, “Is the sign lighted?” and Hall replied, “It is illuminated. Yes. With LEDs.” When asked about wattage, Hall said he did not know the wattage. Hall also described the sign’s color: “It is also majority green. I would say 60% of the sign is green.” The board clarified that the fixture is not a spotlight.
After questions, a board member moved to approve the application and received a second. A vote was called and members answered aye; the motion carried. The transcript does not specify a timetable for installation or provide the exact LED wattage.
The record shows no callers or written opposition to the application and no public comments against the request during the hearing. The approval permits the specific, illuminated five-foot logo described in the application; any changes to illumination, size or placement would require additional review if not consistent with the approved design.
Details not specified at the hearing include the LED wattage, the anticipated installation date, and the full list of board member votes by name beyond those recorded as saying “aye.”
