Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Brentwood Public Library topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Brentwood commission delays library site plan after debate over brick ‘Library’ lettering
Summary
The Planning & Zoning Commission carried over the Brentwood Public Library site-development, rezoning and comprehensive sign plan to Jan. 8 after extended debate over whether the proposed brick-formed typographic treatment is a sign and how large it should be.
Get email alerts on the Brentwood Public Library topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Brentwood Planning & Zoning Commission on Dec. 11 carried over consideration of the Brentwood Public Library’s site-development plan, lot consolidation, rezoning and comprehensive sign plan to the commission’s Jan. 8 meeting after a lengthy discussion over a large brick typographic treatment on the building’s south facade.
Architect Steven Kessel, speaking for the library design team, described the project as an adaptive reuse of the former Retina Institute at 221 (rendering also shows 2201) South Brentwood Boulevard into a new public library. Kessel said the proposal preserves much of the original masonry, adds a glass storefront entrance and uses a custom brick articulation to form the word “Library” in relief on the façade. He said the letterforms are about 11 feet 9½ inches tall and about 66 feet long, yielding roughly a 787.5-square-foot lettered portion within a 1,574-square-foot brick façade.
The staff report noted the city’s sign code sets a typical maximum sign area at 250 square feet (citing Chapter 410) and recommended the comprehensive sign plan process if the commission wished to allow a larger graphic. City legal counsel said the brick typography meets the municipal code’s definition of a sign — "any device, fixture, placard or structure that uses...writing to advertise, announce the purpose of, or identify the purpose of a person or entity" — because the treatment communicates the building’s use.
Several commissioners and members of the public raised concerns about precedent and scale. Commissioner Sherry Bilderback said she viewed the feature as “awful” and resembling a billboard; she urged that the commission treat the proposal under ordinary sign-code rules unless a full comprehensive sign package for the entire building is submitted. Architect-commissioner remarks and testimony from Ed Wright Jr., president of the library board, emphasized the civic character of the project and public support from multiple outreach sessions.
Staff and the city’s landscape consultant, Andrew Franke of Playing Design Studio, recommended conditions addressing outstanding landscape issues: a revised landscape plan was provided the afternoon of the meeting and Franke asked the commission to consider a post-installation review to identify and replace any dead plant material. A nearby property owner, who identified himself as Sivovaru of 8820 Moritz, asked the commission to ensure long‑standing water‑remediation and boundary landscaping concerns with adjacent properties are resolved as part of site approvals.
Commissioners asked the applicant for intermediate-size renderings between the applicant’s ~787-square-foot proposal and the 250-square-foot figure cited in the code, and they discussed rooftop equipment screening and materials that would reduce visibility from residential areas. Kessel explained the mechanical strategy: the renovation retains three existing rooftop HVAC units and adds seven smaller units to serve the addition, and screening panels proposed are louvered metal to allow service access.
With those follow-ups requested, the commission voted to carry the library application to the Jan. 8, 2025 Planning & Zoning meeting so the design team can provide revised signage options and staff can finalize outstanding landscaping clarifications. No final approvals or waivers of the sign standard were adopted at this meeting.

