Plain Board of Zoning Appeals Hears Appeal, Defers Decision on Guitar-Shaped Sign at 138 West Main

The Plain Board of Zoning Appeals on April 9 heard an appeal of a zoning administrator’s denial of a sign permit for 138 West Main Street and a related request for three variances, but did not decide the case and moved to private deliberations. The board scheduled a public vote on the appeal and the variance applications for its May 14 meeting.

The appeal seeks reversal of a February 27, 2025 denial of sign permit 24-38 and approval of three variances to allow a projecting, guitar-shaped sign larger than the Uptown Overlay limit and projecting farther from the building than the code permits. Nathan Painter, attorney for Tim Dawson Holdings LLC, presented the appeal and told the board the proposed sign would be “black and white, backlit” and that the applicant plans to remove an existing round sign if the new sign is approved.

Painter argued the proposal complies with the intent of the Uptown Commercial Overlay District and noted historical projecting and symbolic signs in Plain City’s past. He said the sign “was rejected, because the projecting sign is nonconformant with the sign code and not in conformity with the quote quote unquote historical nature of the area,” and added that the code itself does not expressly prohibit the guitar-shaped sign. Painter gave the board three variance requests: allow a sign larger than 9 square feet, allow a projection of 4 feet off the building (the code limit cited by staff is 3 feet for projecting signs), and permit a non-rectangular (guitar-shaped) sign in the Uptown Overlay.

Applicant Tim Dawson testified that his current round sign is larger than the base of the proposed guitar and that the new sign would replace the existing sign. Dawson said he has invested in expanding the business and that the new sign is intended to draw patrons to live music at the Granary. Dawson told the board his existing round sign is “approximately 15 square feet. It’s 5 feet by 5 feet,” and later referred to a prior variance for a different (silo) sign on the same property.

Village planner and zoning administrator Hutchinson explained the staff’s measurement method for irregular signs: sign area is measured by a bounding square or rectangle that covers the sign’s outermost extents. As Hutchinson put it during the hearing, when measuring an irregular shape “you take the widest the height of it, and it’s basically a square,” resulting in a larger square-foot calculation than the applicant’s surface-area calculation. Hutchinson also reviewed the Uptown design guidance and explained that several older projecting signs in Uptown are legal nonconforming or were previously granted variances.

Painter and Dawson offered historical photographs and examples — including an old Westinghouse sign and other projecting signs — to argue that symbolic projecting signs are part of Plain City’s historical character. Painter said the proposed sign’s 16.5 square feet by his calculation is “less than double the max allowed” under the code’s 9-square-foot limit and that the proposed design is not “gaudy.” Hutchinson and staff countered that the code’s measurement approach yields a larger figure for regulatory purposes; staff also noted a new sign code that planning and zoning approved in March and that is slated for first reading at council.

No members of the public offered testimony on the case during the public-comment period. After presentations and board questions, the board chair closed public hearing and the members voted to go into private deliberations. The panel will return to public session and issue a written vote and findings at the BZA’s May 14 meeting, which the board confirmed falls within the 45-day decision deadline for appeals under its rules.

Procedural items earlier in the meeting included approval of the March 12, 2025 BZA minutes and the appointment of a chair and vice chair for the 2025 term; those actions were taken before opening the appeal hearing.

The record in the hearing includes the applicant’s exhibits and historical images, staff’s slide presentation on sign measurement and the Uptown design guide, and testimony from the applicant and his attorney. The board did not render a final decision on the appeal or on the three requested variances at the April 9 meeting; those decisions will be announced at the May 14 meeting.