Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Signage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission approves monument-sign variance for Crescent Woods apartments near I-270
Summary
The commission approved V-00006-2026 allowing an 80-sq-ft, 10.5-ft-tall monument sign placed 8 ft 1 in from the edge of the I-270 on-ramp right-of-way at 721 Crescent Woods Drive, citing site constraints (retaining wall and waterline) and prior local approvals along the corridor.
The Gahanna Planning Commission approved a monument-sign variance for Crescent Woods apartments (V-00006-2026) during its March 11 meeting.
Staff explained the site at 721 Crescent Woods Drive (R4, multi-unit residential) has a retaining wall and a water line on the northern edge that make the ordinance-required 15-foot setback impractical at the proposed location. The requested sign would be 10.5 feet tall and 80 square feet with a planter base; the applicant revised the original submittal to place the base 8 feet 1 inch from the right-of-way edge at staff recommendation. Staff and engineering required the sign not extend over the water line; staff noted the site remains below the maximum aggregate sign area allowed for the property and that similar variances have been approved along I-270.
Don Hayden of Morrison Sign Company, the applicant’s representative, told commissioners the sign was oriented perpendicular to the freeway to increase visibility for eastbound and westbound drivers and that placing a sign on the building was not practical because the apartment windows and patios face away from the freeway.
Commissioners questioned alternatives such as rotating the sign or placing it on the building. Staff and the applicant explained the retaining wall and water line constrain location choices. The engineering review did not identify outstanding sight-line or safety issues; staff confirmed the proposed sign keeps the site below the total square-footage limit for monument signs on the property.
Ms. Laser moved to approve the variance; the motion was seconded and carried in roll call with a single dissenting vote. The commission recorded that the granting of this variance reflected site constraints and prior local approvals for similar signage in the corridor.
