The Middleton Zoning Board of Appeals voted 5–1 on Dec. 17 to deny a request from John Bergstrom, owner of the Lexus dealership in Middleton, to install a 40-foot, two-sided monument sign along Airport Road.

Bergstrom asked the board for a variance from the city's sign ordinance to erect a sign the application described as about 100 square feet in area, far larger than the ordinance's 6-foot height and 36-square-foot size limit. The board's staff packet cited ordinance sections 22-11-1(a), 22-31(g) and 22-33-4(a) as the provisions that the proposed sign would not meet.

The applicant told the board the dealership sits below the highway and that existing building signage is not visible to passing traffic, creating a business hardship. "It's a significant hardship," John Bergstrom said, adding the sign would be a high-quality, backlit monument and that he had worked with state and DOT officials. He also offered flexibility, saying he would place the sign in the northeast corner of the site or reduce the size if the board preferred.

Neighbors who spoke during the public hearing urged the board to reject the variance or require clearer visuals before approval. "Why not come and talk to us? I'm a friendly guy," said Flomor Adili, a resident of the Highwood neighborhood, who also raised concerns about potential blinking FAA or airport safety lights and light pollution affecting his household. Adili said he wanted to see an elevation from local residences "so we have no idea what it's going to look like." David Shaw, another nearby resident, asked for visuals showing how the sign would appear from houses to the north.

Board members questioned whether the applicant had exhausted alternatives, such as enlarging building-mounted signage or moving the sign to a location that would minimize neighborhood impact. Members cited the recent zoning code rewrite that removed allowance for new billboards and said the ordinance's monument-sign standard is meant for entrance signage, not large highway-facing displays. One board member summarized the concern as a lack of demonstrated hardship and a need for three-dimensional imagery showing the sign's impact from the highway and nearby properties.

Staff noted technical details in the application: the site elevation is roughly 930'935 feet above sea level while the airport height limitation allows up to 995 feet; the applicant's plans cite the sign top at about 38 feet 9 inches above ground in one measurement; and landscaping requirements call for 38 landscape points based on sign width, a plan the applicant submitted and which staff said complies with the ordinance's landscaping rule.

After discussion, board member Justin moved to deny the variance "based on lack of hardship," Bob seconded, and the motion carried 5'1. The board closed the hearing and adjourned.

The decision denies the specific variance request that night. The transcript records board members encouraging the applicant to provide clearer visual simulations and to consider smaller or alternative signage solutions if the applicant seeks approval again.