Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Signage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents object, but Marvin council approves limited third wall sign for Dunkin' Donuts
Summary
After a public hearing with residents urging preservation of Marvin Gardens’ design standards, the council approved a zoning-text amendment allowing a third wall sign for a Dunkin' Donuts but amended the approval to limit the change to out parcel 2 (the corner building with double frontage).
The Village of Marvin on Feb. 2 approved a targeted zoning-text amendment to allow an additional wall‑mounted sign for the Dunkin' Donuts building in the Marvin Gardens development, but the council narrowed the approval so the exception applies only to the corner out parcel with double roadway frontage.
Hunter, the planner, told the council that Marvin Gardens’ conditional‑district standards generally allow two wall signs per building and that the applicant requested an additional sign because the corner building has two public frontages (New Town Road and Providence). "The proposed sign if approved would be the same exact one in dimensions that already comply with the Marvin Gardens ICD development standards and it would just be placed there on the rear of the structure," Hunter said.
Two residents spoke in opposition during the public hearing. Lauren Thomas (3025 Groves Edge Lane) warned that amending the ordinance sets a precedent: "Amending the ordinance is not something that would be necessarily a good idea…if we can keep the signage as it is…that’s a precedent to set for additional signage for other vendors." Kristen Conway (12017 Carolina Cherry) also urged caution to preserve the development’s design palette and "rural charm."
Council debate focused on competing priorities: several members said they supported the planning board’s unanimous recommendation to approve, noting the site’s unique double frontage and the applicant’s compliance with dimensional standards. Others — including the council member representing nearby neighborhoods — emphasized the community’s prior involvement in negotiating signage limits and voiced concern about eroding the development’s character.
Council action: Councilmember Tom moved to adopt the amendment; members later successfully moved to amend the motion so the change would apply only to out parcel 2. The amended motion passed by voice vote. Council members said the tighter, parcel‑specific language answers residents’ concerns about a broad amendment applying throughout Marvin Gardens.
Why it matters: The vote balanced a merchant’s request to increase visibility for a tenant against neighborhood desire to maintain consistent design standards in a master‑planned development. Because the approval was written to apply only to the corner parcel, staff said it should not automatically allow additional signage for other out parcels.
What’s next: Staff will produce an updated ordinance exhibit reflecting the amendment limited to out parcel 2 and will file the revised language in the village records; the applicant’s finalized sign permit will be subject to the ICD dimensional rules previously adopted by the development.
