Perrysburg board approves four zoning variances for signs and setbacks

Members of the Perrysburg Board & Committees approved four zoning variance requests affecting freestanding signage and residential setbacks during a public meeting.

The variances — for two freestanding/hanging signs in the C-2 Central Business District and two residential setback reductions in the R-3 single-family district — were approved on motions that followed staff recommendations and brief remarks from applicants and neighbors.

Staff recommended approval for all four items, citing the relevant zoning code sections and the character of the historic district where applicable. For 111 East Second Street, the applicant for Naturally Bridal requested permission to install a freestanding sign 2 feet from the property line so the sign would be visible from the street; staff recommended approval, noting the proposed placement would be consistent with other freestanding signs in the historic district. Alexis Paragoy, who identified herself as the applicant, described Naturally Bridal as “a retail store and an artist like maker space workshop. So, jewelry, artwork, handmade objects, apparel, anything that ties back to nature.” The board voted to approve the variance.

At 108 East Second Street, a representative for Grassroots Recycling to Reuse Network requested a variance to hang a freestanding sign 1 foot from the property line on an existing sign post. Staff and the Historic Landmarks Commission supported using the hanging post rather than a window sign; the board approved the variance.

At 429 West Fifth Street, the owner sought a front-yard setback variance to allow a recently constructed deck to remain roughly 11 feet from the front property line. Staff said aerial imagery showed a prior deck at a similar location and recommended approval under the listed variance criteria; the board approved the request.

At 332 East Front Street, an applicant requested a side-yard setback variance to attach a new addition to the existing garage, which would place the addition approximately 1 foot from the property line. Staff recommended approval after finding the addition would not create new safety or visibility issues; the board approved the variance. Neighbors asked questions about the extent of demolition and how the addition would sit relative to the alley during the public discussion.

Votes at a glance

• Application 5-25 (111 East Second Street, Naturally Bridal): variance to allow a freestanding sign 2 feet from property line — approved. Votes recorded: Matthew Sutter — yes; Bill Williams — yes; Michael McIntyre — yes; Aaron O'Rear — yes.

• Application 6F-25 (108 East Second Street, Grassroots Recycling to Reuse Network): variance to hang freestanding sign 1 foot from property line — approved. Votes recorded: Matthew Sutter — yes; Bill Williams — yes; Michael McIntyre — yes; Aaron O'Rear — yes.

• Application 7-25 (429 West Fifth Street): front-yard setback variance to retain deck approximately 11 feet from property line — approved. Votes recorded: Michael McIntyre — yes; Aaron O'Rear — yes; Maggie Sutter — yes; Bill Williams — yes.

• Application (332 East Front Street): side-yard setback variance to attach addition to garage, placing addition ~1 foot from property line — approved. Votes recorded: Aaron O'Rear — yes; Matthew Sutter — yes; Bill Williams — yes; Michael McIntyre — yes.

Meeting procedure and context

Staff administered the oath to witnesses at the start of the hearing. The board’s zoning or planning staff cited municipal zoning code sections for freestanding signage and setback variances and recommended approval on each item after reviewing site conditions, existing structures, and the Historic Landmarks Commission’s input where relevant. Several applicants and neighbors used the public microphone to state names and addresses for the record and to ask procedural or site‑specific questions; no formal appeals or written objections were recorded on the transcript.

The board’s approvals were recorded as motions with seconds and roll-call-style confirmations; the motions referenced the city zoning criteria for variances and relied on staff findings that the requests met the applicable standards.