Blue Springs council rejects request to keep nonconforming Tim Hortons pole sign

Blue Springs City Council members on Monday voted against allowing an existing nonconforming pole sign to remain at the proposed Tim Hortons at 1900 NW 7 Highway, rejecting a resolution that would have allowed the sign despite staff and planning commission objections.

Planning staff told the council the sign request was not supported by the city's sign code and that the property was about 3,069 feet from the Interstate 70 corridor; the existing pole sign sits within a water easement and the staff report said there is roughly 4 feet 6 inches of clear space where a monument sign could be placed. “Staff does not recommend approval of the master alternative sign plan application at this time,” a city staff presenter told the council.

The issue reached the council after the planning commission voted not to recommend the master alternative sign plan at its March 24 meeting. The staff presentation said the applicant was informed of the 10-day appeal window after that denial and that no appeal was filed in the allowable timeframe. The applicant, identified in the meeting as Mr. William Brown, told the council he had eye surgery and missed the appeal filing deadline; he argued the pole sign is necessary for visibility on a commuter corridor and that a monument sign could not fit in the available space.

Council debate focused on two lines of argument: whether the city should make an exception to help a new business, and whether doing so would undercut an ordinance the council adopted to remove pole signs outside the I-70 corridor. Supporters of the applicant said the sign would aid a commuter-dependent business trying to attract first-time customers; one council member called it “a no-brainer” to let the business use the existing sign. Opponents said the ordinance must be applied consistently and raised concerns about setting a precedent if the council permitted the nonconforming sign to remain.

When the council took a roll-call vote on a motion to approve the resolution as presented, the tally was: Yes — Council member Edmonson, Mayor Levassay; No — Council members Rowan, Kaler, Dolan, Brummell, Erickson; the motion failed.

The council did first untable item 4 to allow the applicant to speak and then returned the matter to formal consideration. Planning staff and the applicant both answered council questions about distances to I‑70, the sign's square footage (about 80 square feet per the application), the easement encroachment, and whether alternative monument signage could be installed to the 12-foot monument height limit. Staff said engineering and public works had not cleared an easement exception, and that removal of trees or other site changes had not been discussed with staff as a pathway to a compliant monument sign.

The council's vote leaves the planning commission denial intact for now; the applicant may pursue other options allowed by city code but the council did not authorize continued use of the existing pole sign at Monday’s meeting.

(Background: the Backyard Burgers tenant vacated the site more than 180 days ago, which contributed to the site's current nonconforming sign status.)