Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Signage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board asks staff to draft clearer rules for nonconforming and large-format signs
Summary
Staff proposed letting businesses reface legal nonconforming signs without a variance if new signs match or are smaller in size, and recommended specific allowances for extra-large retail entrances and monument signs for multi‑tenant centers; board members asked staff to draft explicit language to preserve the original intent while reducing routine variance requests.
Staff for the Reynoldsburg Planning and Zoning Board presented proposed changes to the city zoning code to clarify when rebranding or replacing existing commercial signs counts as a new sign and when it may be treated as a reface.
The proposal, described by a staff presenter, would allow a legal nonconforming sign to be replaced with a new sign that is not larger in height or length and does not exceed the existing square footage, potentially letting tenants rebrand without seeking a variance. "A sign face is the surface of a sign upon, against, or through which the message of the sign is exhibited," the staff presenter said, explaining existing definitions and the proposal.
Staff cited examples of recent variances prompted by rebranding — Culver's, Bath & Body Works and Walmart — and contrasted older, box-style signs (Sherwin‑Williams) with newer channel-letter styles (OhioHealth). Board members broadly supported the goal of avoiding routine variance requests but urged staff to return with precise draft text. "I think for me to give a big thumbs up, I would need to see the exact language which you're proposing because I think the devil's in the details," a committee member said.
The draft would also create a distinct 'retail extra large format' land-use class for buildings larger than 50,000 square feet and allow a wall sign at every public entrance plus a branding sign for those stores. Staff gave examples (Kroger, Walmart, Sam's Club, Home Depot, Lowe's, Target) and separately proposed allowing a pickup-area wall sign for businesses with designated pickup areas in CC, BMD and EMD districts.
For multi‑tenant commercial centers, staff recommended code provisions that could permit a monument sign at each ingress/egress plus an overall center identifier, while emphasizing the intent is not to preserve oversized pylon signs but to provide a uniform way to list tenants. The board discussed limits on sign dimensions and whether changing the sign enclosure would be treated as a structural replacement requiring a variance.
Staff said they will workshop draft ordinance language and return to the board for another detailed sign conversation. The board gave staff direction to pursue code amendments rather than rely on repeated variance requests.
