Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Reuse topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board allows 90-sq-ft roof-mounted sign for proposed retro diner at 2432 Bypass Road
Summary
The BZA approved a variance permitting a 90-square-foot roof-mounted neon sign for a proposed 1950s-style diner (to be called Eddie's Drive In) at 2432 Bypass Road, citing the building’s glass-front design and a desire to preserve character; staff noted roof signs are generally prohibited but recommended approval.
Get email alerts on the Historic Reuse topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Elkhart City Board of Zoning Appeals approved Dec. 11 a developmental variance permitting a 90-square-foot roof-mounted sign at 2432 Bypass Road to support the proposed retro diner project.
Todd Layman of SCIENTec Sign Services said the owners — identified in testimony as doctors Roger Pesina and Richard Bowling — acquired an original 1950s diner sign in New York and seek to reinstall it as part of a reopened diner to be named "Eddie's Drive In." Layman said the original neon sign is stainless steel and part of a preservation effort: “It would be really kind of cool to see it saved.”
Staff flagged that roof-mounted signage is typically prohibited in the sign code and that the site’s glass-front wall makes wall signage difficult without additional variances. Because of the building’s design and the petitioner’s proposal to reuse a historic sign, staff recommended approval citing findings that the sign would not injure public welfare and that special circumstances exist related to the structure’s style.
Board members asked clarifying questions about the project’s form and when decisions about the restaurant concept would be finalized. With no public opposition presented to the board and staff recommending approval, members moved and seconded a motion to approve the requested variance; the roll call returned unanimous yes votes from Mulvaney, Lightman and Ivana Rykov.
The approval allows the petitioner to proceed with sign permitting under the conditions described in the staff report. Staff said they typically do not support this type of roof sign but made an exception given the building’s glazing and the sign’s historic character.

