Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Signs Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City Council denies appeal for oversized electronic sign on Highway 50, directs ordinance review
Summary
The Vermillion City Council voted Jan. 5 to deny an appeal of a building official’s denial of a 12-by-24-foot (288 sq ft) electronic sign permit at 1405 E. SD Highway 50 and instructed staff to pursue legislative changes to sign regulations for Highway 50 rather than grant a variance.
The Vermillion City Council voted Jan. 5 to deny an appeal from an applicant seeking an oversized electronic freestanding sign at 1405 East South Dakota Highway 50, reaffirming the building official’s interpretation of the city’s sign code and directing staff to pursue ordinance changes through the legislative process.
Alex Goodwin, the city’s building official, told the council the application for a 12-by-24-foot electronic freestanding sign (288 square feet) submitted Nov. 10, 2025 exceeds the heavy‑industrial zoning district’s maximum freestanding sign area of 144 square feet and therefore failed to comply with city code. He said the state Department of Transportation had approved the larger size but emphasized that “as the sign is within city limits, the city has the final determination in the size of the sign based on locally adopted code.”
Multiple business representatives and the applicant urged the council to allow larger signs along Highway 50 for visibility. Eric Vanderskaff of Decoy Digital Signs said the larger size is standard for higher-speed roads and that “the state has approved that size,” and property owner Dave Hertz argued he should not have a smaller sign than his neighbor.
Council discussion focused on whether the council could legally overrule the building official on appeal and on the practical question of consistency along Highway 50. City Attorney John and other council members said variance authority is limited when a request falls outside zoning regulations and that the proper path to accommodate larger signs is an ordinance amendment requiring two readings. As John summarized, the sign rules historically have been treated as business regulations tied to zoning categories rather than zoning text itself, and any change should proceed through the legislative route.
Councilor Murrah moved to deny the applicant’s appeal and Councilor Cheeseman seconded. After brief discussion about the applicant’s construction timeline (the applicant said they hoped to begin excavation by March), the motion carried.
The council stopped short of changing the permit decision but signaled support for broader code work: members suggested separating Highway 50 standards from Cherry Street rules, holding a noon meeting to develop language, and then scheduling required readings. City staff said changes could be scheduled for a January noon meeting with possible first reading at the Jan. 20 council meeting.
What’s next: The appeal was denied; staff and council indicated they will pursue ordinance revisions to clarify sign size and location rules for Highway 50 and other corridors. Any ordinance change would require formal readings and public notice before taking effect.
