Planning board approves Town Pump sign variance despite residents' lighting concerns

The Belgrade Planning Board on Monday approved a sign‑variance request from Town Pump at 206 West Jefferson to replace an existing two‑pole freestanding sign with a single‑pole freestanding sign 60 feet tall.

The variance allows the applicant to retain sign area larger than the 40‑square‑foot maximum for freestanding signs in the city’s current zoning code. Hayden (planner for the city of Belgrade) said the application materials identify the existing sign and the proposed replacement as 150 square feet, and that the change is being treated as an alteration and relocation under the zoning ordinance (City of Belgrade Zoning Ordinance, Sec. 10.5.12). The applicant, Michael Cashman (display marketing manager, Town Pump), said during the hearing the project would reuse the existing sign cabinets and that the work is being done to remove one pole so vehicle access and parking can function after the site reconfiguration; he also said the sign was originally installed on Dec. 26, 1995.

The application drew comments from nearby homeowners. Shane McLaughlin, who owns the property behind the site, asked about the permitted number of signs and whether the change would increase sign coverage on the parcel. Sarah McLaughlin, who owns a nearby home at 202 West Custer, said she and other residents have experienced light intruding into living spaces from existing signage and asked whether color/intensity limits — specifically blue light — are regulated. Brad Stein, senior planner for the city, told the board photometric standards in the code are intended to prevent light from bleeding off site.

Hayden and staff told the board the district’s maximum allowed sign height is 60 feet, so height was not the reason for the variance request; the code’s square‑foot limit for freestanding signs (40 square feet) is the standard at issue. During the hearing there was an unresolved discrepancy in the record about sign area: the staff presentation described the sign as 150 square feet, while multiple participants later referred to a 50‑square‑foot figure and the applicant repeatedly said the replacement would be “the exact same” size as the sign being removed. The board did not ask staff to return for clarification of that specific numerical discrepancy before voting.

Board members discussed balancing the intent of the newer sign code — which reduces freestanding sign area compared with earlier standards — against an applicant’s request to avoid removing existing sign area when redeveloping an established site. Sargent Bolesby (board member) moved to approve the variance “to modify the freestanding sign as requested”; the motion was seconded (second speaker not specified in the record). The board approved the motion by voice vote; the meeting record does not include a roll‑call tally. Planning staff said this planning‑board decision is final, and that legal appeals would go to the City Council.

In response to resident concerns, the applicant and his contractor, Terry Thielen of EPCON Signs, said the sign would remain on applicant property and that they will check Montana Department of Transportation encroachment rules and the city’s photometric requirements as the work proceeds. The applicant said engineering changes will increase pole diameter at the base (from two 24‑inch poles to a single 36‑inch bottom section) to support the existing cabinets and that the project is intended to remove one pole while keeping the sign appearance similar to what has been there for years. The applicant estimated a June opening for the redeveloped site, subject to permitting and interior work.

The approval prompted objections from neighbors who asked the board to consider cumulative signage and off‑site light effects; board members and staff noted those concerns during deliberations but voted to approve the requested variance.

Votes at a glance Motion: Approve variance to modify freestanding sign as requested (move from two‑pole to single‑pole sign at 206 West Jefferson). Mover: Sargent Bolesby. Second: not specified in the record. Vote: approved by voice vote; roll‑call tally not specified. Outcome: approved. Appeal: legal appeal avenue is City Council.

What remains Staff and the applicant indicated they will confirm encroachment requirements with MDT, verify photometric compliance, and coordinate sign engineering and foundation work. The transcript does not record a final construction permit issuance date or a firm project schedule beyond the applicant's June estimate.