The subject of this hearing is a variance request of twenty-two (22)
square feet from the required maximum permanent ground sign area of
forty (40) square feet, resulting in a permanent ground sign area of
sixty-two (62) square feet pursuant to section 1207.17(d)(4)(A) “Signs in
Nonresidential Districts - Maximum Area” of the City of Hudson Land
Development Code in order to construct a ground sign.
The applicant is Dave Soulsby, 924 Home Ave, Akron, Ohio 44310. The
property owner is GTS Services LLC, 5876 Darrow Rd, Hudson, Ohio 44236
for the property at 5876 Darrow Rd in District 7 [Office Overlay] within the
City of Hudson.
Attachments:
Ms. Coffman introduced the application by describing the property and project, reviewing the applicable LDCs,
and the purpose of the project.
Mr. Dave Soulsby stated: The property is not useful with the current ground sign because the tenants cannot be
identified, the property was purchased in 2005 when the current regulations were not in effect, and that there is
no other effective way to design the sign.
Mr. Mike Valentine, property owner, noted the current sign has been in place for 20 years, that there are new
tenants in the building that cannot be identified using the existing sign, and that other signs in the area are similar
to the requested sign.
The Board, applicant, and staff discussed: That the request will add approximately 70 square feet to the sign, part
of which does not count toward the maximum sign size because of screening, that the maximum height allowable
for this sign is 8 feet - which is not an issue, that both companies that are moving into the building desire their
information on the sign, that their moving in may be contingent on their names being on the sign, that other sign
formats will be financially challenging at $4,000 to $5,000 additional, that the percentage of the sign allocated
towards the current occupant is part of their lease, that Mr. Valentine has authority to speak on their behalf of the
3 tenants, that signage (or the lack of signage) is a long-term issue in Hudson, that many signs exist in this
district, and that the three businesses will be strengthen if the variance is granted, The Board expressed empathy
for dealing with the existing contract, and noted the sign can be made compliant if the owner would pay the
money for a new sign.
The Board, applicant, and staff noted, The square footage of surrounding signs is smaller than the existing sign
on this property, that no lighting will be added to the existing, that the owner is willing to add landscaping around
the sign if needed, that the Historic Village character is different from this District Seven Overlay, and that the
requested variance will not affect the neighborhood in a negative way.
There were no Public Comments.
The Board discussed the variance noting: There are less obtrusive ways to use the current sign - even if the owner
desires not to modify it, that the LDC prohibits the desired sign, that improving the signage in this area begins
with applying the standard to new signs, that a new business/tenant is moving into Hudson and desires
recognition on the sign, that the variance may assist emergency services if it is clearly known who is in the
building, and the lease with a tenant may prohibit tearing down or changing the existing sign.
Mr. Kahrl made a motion, seconded by Mr. Scott, based on the evidence presented to the
