Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Signage Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board denies similar signage variance for Pickard Street dealership
Summary
A second variance request from the same franchise for temporary flags at a Pickard Street lot that spans city and township property was denied after board members said it would set an undesirable precedent and did not meet variance criteria.
The Zoning Board of Appeals on May 27 denied a second Graff-related request to increase temporary banner signage at the dealership property that includes 1422–1426 East Pickard Street.
Staff framed the request as substantively similar to the earlier case and reiterated that Sec. 154.414(b)(3) limits temporary signs to two per site, with size and placement rules. The staff presentation also noted the lot spans city and adjacent township parcels, raising jurisdictional nuance.
Seth Blackie, speaking for the dealerships, reiterated that the flags are part of the brand image and requested flexibility for outdoor display lots. Board members again acknowledged the marketing constraints of dealers but emphasized the need to adhere to the sign code and avoid ad hoc changes that could require equal treatment for other properties.
Staff suggested that if the board wanted to provide consistent relief for dealerships, the planning commission could consider a code amendment that treats open outdoor vehicle display areas differently. In the absence of a code change and because the variance application did not satisfy the required findings, the motion to approve the variance failed and the board denied the request for the Pickard Street lot.
The board did not direct enforcement action beyond the denial and suggested the applicant pursue a planning commission process for any broader sign-code amendments.
