Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Signage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission denies Tim Hortons request to retain nonconforming pole sign on North 7 Highway
Summary
Commissioners voted 4-2 to deny Tim Hortons' request to retain an existing nonconforming pole sign at 1900 NW 7 Highway because the sign lies outside the I‑70 corridor distance allowed under sign code 501.06(c)(2)(a).
The Blue Springs Planning Commission denied an alternative sign plan for Tim Hortons on March 24, 2025, voting 4‑2 to reject a request to keep an existing nonconforming pole sign at 1900 NW 7 Highway. Staff recommended denial because the property and sign do not meet the sign‑code criteria for pole signs outside the I‑70 corridor. The applicant may appeal the commission’s decision.
Ms. Fry, the city planner presenting the item, said the existing pole sign was originally installed for a former Backyard Burgers and has been nonconforming since the business closed. She told commissioners the sign is approximately "3,069 feet from the I‑70 corridor," and cited sign code section 501.06(c)(2)(a), which restricts continued use of pole signs outside the corridor. "Staff does not recommend approval of the alternative sign plan application," Fry said.
Roy Brown, the architect representing Tim Hortons, said the chain is opening several Midwest locations and that the company was unaware the sign could not be refaced after the property had been vacant long enough to trigger the nonconforming limitation. Brown said the sign helps visibility for a commuter‑dependent business and could support other businesses on North 7 Highway; he asked the commission to approve the sign to avoid a delay of several weeks before a council appeal could be considered.
Commission discussion focused on the city’s policy to reduce pole signs outside the corridor, the timeline that starts the nonconforming clock (ownership triggers the vacancy‑clock), and precedent. One commissioner said removing the sign would support efforts to reduce pole signage along Highway 7; another commissioner said the circumstances were unfortunate but that adherence to the code mattered.
A motion to approve (moved from the floor) was seconded and put to roll call. The vote recorded in the transcript was: Commissioner Sanderson, Nay; Commissioner Howe, Aye; Commissioner Ingersoll, Nay; Commissioner Stokenberry, Aye; Commissioner Pumphrey, Nay; Chairperson Henning, Nay. The motion failed and the alternative sign plan was denied. Staff noted the applicant may appeal to the City Council.
