Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sign Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board debates 96-square-foot cap versus percentage-of-facade rule for signage; staff to draft alternatives
Summary
Members of the Danville Board of Adjustments discussed inconsistencies in the zoning ordinance's sign standards—specifically a 96-square-foot cap and a percentage-of-facade rule—and asked planning staff to draft language options for the planning commission and the board to consider.
The Danville Board of Adjustments spent an extended portion of new business discussing an apparent inconsistency in the joint planning and zoning ordinance sign standards: whether a 96-square-foot cap or a percentage-of-facade measurement should control allowed wall sign sizes.
Board members and staff agreed the ordinance language has produced inconsistent application: in some past cases the 96-square-foot figure was treated as a maximum regardless of facade size, while in other cases the board applied a percentage-of-facade test or a case-by-case judgment. Staff advised that leaving the 96-square-foot language in place could force many applicants to seek Board of Adjustments review; board members said that outcome could be burdensome for business customers.
Lyndon Smith, interim director for the Bluegrass ad, told the board the planning commission is finishing a comprehensive plan update and that review of the zoning ordinance, including sign standards, would likely follow. Smith said, "Once that gets done, then I'm sure they'll wanna turn to issues in the zoning ordinance, just like this and and try and find a reasonable compromise for that that's, you know, broadly bridal enough to cover every situation, but also allows for a reasonable outcome on it. So I I would I would say we'll come up with, numerous different variations of the language." Staff and several board members noted previous cases (including CHI and a Southtown shopping-center case) where interpretations differed, and some board members said context (zone: central business vs. highway business vs. light industrial) should inform any caps or percentages.
No ordinance change was made at the meeting. The board asked staff to prepare multiple draft language options and examples showing how different measurements would apply to typical building facades and sign types. The board suggested options might distinguish by zone (central business, highway business, light industrial) and sign type (pole sign, wall sign, multi-tenant center). Staff said they will return with alternatives for the planning commission and board to consider.
