Pender County planning board approves variance for TransSource dealership sign along I‑40

The Pender County Planning Board voted 4–1 to approve a variance allowing a TransSource dealership sign near the Rocky Point interchange on Interstate 40 to rise to 50 feet and expand from 200 to 272 square feet, contingent on consolidating three parcels into a single parcel.

Justin, a county planner who presented the staff report, told the board the request seeks relief from the Pender County Unified Development Ordinance maximum freestanding sign height of 25 feet and the ordinance provision that limits sign area by frontage. Justin said staff’s reading of the UDO is that it intends to prohibit billboard‑style off‑premise advertising along I‑40 while allowing reasonable on‑premise business promotion. “The intent of this article is to regulate the erection, area, height, location, type, and maintenance of signs to promote health, safety, and general welfare,” he said as he reviewed findings the board must consider.

Applicant representative Gabriel Ganem of MagnaSign International, speaking for installer Burchett and lessee Dan Bland of TransSource, showed aerial and roadside photos and said the existing 25‑foot sign is often difficult to see from highway speeds. “The existing sign is virtually invisible,” Ganem said, arguing a taller, purpose‑designed structure would provide directional visibility for both Volvo and Mack brands without reusing the existing footing. Ganem provided rough sight‑distance estimates — about 370 feet to southbound lanes and roughly 310 feet to northbound lanes — and said the applicant is willing to adjust setbacks modestly and to consolidate parcels if required.

At least one board member expressed concern that a large on‑premise sign could be used in the future to circumvent the county’s billboard restrictions. Member Olson (identified in discussion as a board participant) said the record should show the request appears to be directional, not an attempt to convert an on‑premise permit into billboard placement, but urged caution about precedent. “I think the record is made in front of us that this is needed for directional purposes and not to circumvent the ordinance,” the member said.

A motion to approve the variance, including a condition that the applicant consolidate the three lots into one, was moved by Member (Speaker 5) and seconded by Member (Speaker 3). The chair called the vote and announced it carried 4–1.

The board’s approval allows the applicant to proceed with the administrative steps staff described: consolidate parcels by deed, apply for a zoning permit consistent with the variance, and then seek building and electrical permits to construct the new sign or to demolish and relocate the existing one. Justin noted that additional permits will be required for any physical relocation.

The meeting record shows the sign has been on the site in some form since at least 2003, and that the applicant intends to install a wholly new structure. The board did not adopt any text changes to the UDO; the decision was limited to the variance request for this site. The board also received staff announcements and introductions of new planning staff before adjourning.

Next steps: staff will record the condition requiring parcel consolidation and guide the applicant through the zoning and building permit process; the variance takes effect per the board’s standard procedural timelines.