—
A downtown property owner will appear before the Logansport Board of Zoning Appeals next month in an effort to keep a sign in which he says he has already invested thousands of dollars.
Gabriel Lopez, owner of the Golden Palace on Melbourne Avenue, had appeared before the BZA in June seeking a variance for a sign he had already erected. City planners said the sign was about three times the size allowed under downtown sign restrictions.
Lopez pleaded ignorance, saying he didn’t realize he needed a variance or that his sign violated restrictions.
The board intially denied the variance, but Lopez was back this month, offering to drop the height of the sign to 16 feet. He also agreed to add landscaping to lessen its impact.
Board members seem willing to compromise, but they insisted that Lopez come back next month with an engineer’s report ensuring that the sign is structurally sound. Assuming he does that, the odds are that the board will allow him to keep the sign.
The episode has spurred some criticism of the city’s enforcement efforts.
Some have questioned how a property owner could erect a sign only blocks from the City Building without anyone noticing he lacked the necessary permits. That’s a fair question.
Still, the fact that the city did not notice the violation sooner does not excuse the property owner from following the regulations. If the situation does nothing else, it should serve as a reminder to property owners that they should check with the building commissioner before starting a construction project.
A few have suggested that the process is difficult to navigate, that it’s difficult for a business to avoid violating one of the city’s many regulations.
Frankly, we’re not sure that’s true, but we agree that the city should do all that it can to help businesses navigate the process. It should, as much as possible, provide a one-stop shop where businesses can find out everything they need to know about opening or expanding a business. At the very least, the city should make certain that various boards and offices are not sending out contradictory information.
At the same time, though, it really is incumbent on property owners to do their homework. Acting first and apologizing later should not be a viable practice.
If it does nothing else, the city should deliver that message loud and clear.
