TO: Zoning Commission
THRU: Craig Harmon, CZO - Senior Planner
FROM: Demetrios Moutos, AICP - Planner II
DATE: March 10, 2026
RE:Title
A26-04. Order of Approval - Findings of Fact: This case involves a variance request from UDO § 30-5.L.8.B.2, which governs permanent signs for non-residential zoning districts and building-mounted signage. The request seeks approval for Taco Bell to retain the existing number of building-mounted signs on a property with one street frontage, as part of a reimaging project at 1042 Bragg Blvd (REID 0437084978000). Alpha Signs & Lighting, Inc. represents the applicant.
Title
end
end
COUNCIL DISTRICT(S):
Council District(s)
City Council District 2 - Council Member Malik Davis
b
Relationship To Strategic Plan:
This item supports the City’s FY2025 Strategic Plan through its Mission, Vision, and six goals. The City applies development regulations predictably and transparently while balancing public safety and community appearance.
Mission alignment: The variance process impacts quality public services by ensuring fair administration of land development regulations and providing a pathway for relief when strict code application causes undue hardship.
Vision alignment: Signage decisions influence corridor attractiveness and prosperity. The public hearing ensures that land use questions are addressed transparently and with community cohesion.
Goal I - Safety & Security (traffic and pedestrian safety):
• Signage placement and quantity directly impact driver attention and corridor readability, influencing traffic safety.
• The Commission’s review explicitly safeguards public safety and welfare in every variance decision.
Goal II - Diverse & Viable Economy (responsive city government; business climate):
• This request will spur investment and encourage updating of existing business.
• The variance process is a defined mechanism that supports a predictable regulatory environment for all commercial operators.
Goal III - City Investment Planning (invested today and tomorrow; growth and land use; development review):
• A clear sign code and variance pathway support long-term corridor management and ongoing reinvestment.
• This review provides timely, accurate development and customer assessments, leading to efficient service delivery.
Goal IV - Live, Work, & Recreate (quality of place; community experience):
• Signage quantity and visibility affect visual clutter, aesthetics, and perceived corridor character, shaping livability and community experience.
Goal V - Financially Sound City (fiscal stewardship; efficiencies):
• The variance program offsets costs through application fees, strengthening fiscal stewardship.
• Clear standards permanently streamline administration and reduce enforcement uncertainty.
Goal VI - Collaborative Government (transparent engagement; trust and confidence):
• The City ensures transparency and accountability by providing public notice and hosting a quasi-judicial hearing for each case.
• Variance standards rely on evidence-based findings, which boost transparency and public trust in decisions.
Executive Summary:
The applicant requests a variance under the City’s sign regulations so Taco Bell at 1042 Bragg Blvd (PIN 0437084978000) can retain the same number of building-mounted signs as part of a signage update. The request concerns the permitted number of building-mounted signs per street frontage in the City’s sign standards. The Zoning Commission evaluated the request using the variance standards in Section 30-2. C.14.f and relied on competent, material, and substantial evidence presented at the hearing on February 10, 2026. The Commission voted unanimously, 5-0, to approve the variance.
Background:
Request: The applicant requests that Taco Bell at 1042 Bragg Blvd keep the same number of building-mounted signs. The applicant describes signage on multiple elevations, including the front/primary elevation and drive-thru canopy.
Property/Location:
• Address: 1042 Bragg Blvd, Fayetteville, NC 28301
• PIN: 0437084978000
• Existing use: Restaurant (Taco Bell)
Zoning/Land Use Context:
• Subject zoning district: CC - Community Commercial
• Nearby zoning districts: LC, MR-5, and SF-6
• Future Land Use designation on the FLU map: CSR - Commercial Strip Redevelopment (with other nearby categories, including MDR).
Public Notice/Notification: The City sends letters to property owners within the required 300-foot buffer, as shown on the notification mapping for the case. The case file includes additional posting and affidavit materials.
Issues/Analysis:
UDO Section 30-5. L establishes the City’s standards for signage. In Case A26-04, the applicant requests a variance from UDO § 30-5. L.8(B)(2)(a)(1)(i), which limits a single-occupancy building with one street frontage to no more than one building-mounted sign per street frontage, excluding window signs. The request concerns Taco Bell at 1042 Bragg Blvd (REID/PIN 0437084978000). Alpha Signs & Lighting Permitting, on behalf of National Retail Properties LP/Taco Bell, requests approval to retain multiple building-mounted signs as part of a reimaging project.
The request does not involve fence height or perimeter security. Instead, it involves continued display of multiple building-mounted sign elements that would otherwise exceed the current numerical limit for a site with one street frontage. The submitted sign package shows two “TB 3'6" BELL LOGO / TB 12" CHANNEL LTR ON RCWY” signs and one “TB 14" CHANNEL LTR ON RCWY” sign, with sign areas of 20.74 square feet for two sign faces and 9.42 square feet for one sign face.
The applicant states that the newly adopted June 2025 sign code allows only one building-mounted sign for sites with one street frontage. Without a variance, the reimaging would eliminate signage on multiple elevations of the building. The applicant requests to remove the existing signage and install new signs that meet Taco Bell reimaging standards while keeping the same general number of building signs on the structure.
Because this case is quasi-judicial, competent, material, and substantial evidence in the record must support the findings of fact. The attached draft Order reflects the findings and conclusions from the February 10, 2026, evidentiary hearing, based on the variance application, submitted sign plans, staff report, and testimony presented at the hearing.
Insufficient Justification for a Variance:
The following do not constitute valid grounds for granting a variance under UDO 30-2.C.14.g:
• The existence of conforming or nonconforming signs, uses, or structures elsewhere in the same or other zoning districts.
• A request to establish signage or a sign type that is expressly or implicitly prohibited in the zoning district.
• Claims based solely on branding preference, customer familiarity, economic hardship, or increased profitability.
Findings:
The statements below reflect the findings set out in the draft Order to Approve A26-04. The Commission made these findings after considering sworn testimony, admitted evidence, and arguments presented at the evidentiary hearing.
1. Practical difficulties and unnecessary hardships:
a. Strict enforcement of the ordinance requirements creates practical difficulties because the reimaging requires removing and replacing existing signage. Limiting the property to one building-mounted sign would eliminate signage on multiple elevations of the building.
2. Unique circumstances; not self-created:
a. Conditions associated with the property create the practical difficulties, not actions taken by the property owner, because the building has multiple elevations that have historically accommodated signage for the restaurant's use.
3. Minimum action necessary:
a. The requested variance represents the minimum action necessary to enable reasonable use of the property because it allows the property owner to retain the existing quantity and placement of building-mounted signage for the restaurant’s operation.
4. Harmony with the Ordinance; spirit preserved:
a. The variance aligns with the general purpose and intent of the Ordinance and preserves its spirit because the requested signage remains within the ordinance’s size and design standards and does not introduce additional visual impacts beyond those historically associated with the site.
5. Public safety and welfare; substantial justice:
Granting the variance ensures public safety and welfare and upholds substantial justice because the proposed signage modifications do not create traffic safety concerns or other impacts affecting the surrounding area.
Budget Impact:
Case A26-04 does not create a direct fiscal impact for the City. The only cost is the routine staff time for processing the variance application, public notice, supporting the Zoning Commission hearing, and preparing documentation records.
Options:
1. Approve the drafted Findings of Fact, which match the draft Order to Approve A26-04 and the hearing record.
2. Approve the Findings of Fact with revisions, the Zoning Commission requests, and the hearing record supports.
Recommended Action::Recommended Action
Staff does not provide a recommendation. The Zoning Commission must make its decision on Case A26-04. The decision must be based on competent, material, and substantial evidence in the record. The Commission must also apply the required variance standards.
end
Attachments:
1. Order to Approve A26-04 - Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
2. Application (A26-04)
3. A26-04 Zoning Map
4. A26-04 Future Land Use Map
5. A26-04 Aerial Notification Map