The Town of Brownsburg Board of Zoning Appeals on Jan. 13, 2025 denied BZDV‑24‑9290, a QuikTrip request for a 60‑foot pole sign with 138.2 square feet of sign face at 9290 Corrugated Avenue.

The decision followed a staff recommendation to deny the variance after planners concluded the application did not meet the UDO's third criterion for a development‑standards variance: that strict application of the ordinance would result in a practical difficulty for use of the property.

Town planner Ethan (presenting staff) described the request and the three UDO criteria the board must apply: protection of public health and safety, effect on adjacent property values, and whether strict application would cause practical difficulties. He said the site is zoned I‑2, is about 34.56 acres, and that the proposed sign would be off‑premise on an industrial parcel. He summarized staff's review and noted previous BZA denials for similar interstate signage in the area. Jenna (planning staff) told the board that staff did not find the required practical difficulty, saying, "we don't think a practical a practical difficulty exists to this particular site, and we don't think there's anything applicable that's not applicable to all of the other gas stations in town." She also told members the town had identified at least 10 existing gas stations in Brownsburg without signs of the requested height.

QuikTrip representative Gwen Keane, who gave her address for the record, said the company had negotiated property‑owner consent from developer Scannell and argued the sign was "critical to the success and actually, really, the survival of this store, especially when we are new, not only to Brownsburg, but we're new to the state of Indiana." Keane said QuikTrip had produced Google Earth renderings to test visibility and that the company preferred a 100‑foot sign but was requesting 60 feet as a compromise. She added that if the board denied the request, "We would put the store on hold." Keane also argued price visibility is a unique driver for convenience stores and that motorists make quick decisions based on price.

Board members questioned the applicant about visibility evidence and the uniqueness of the alleged economic injury. Several members, including Brett (BZA member) and others, said they wanted numerical visibility or engineering calculations. Brett said he had "a hard time converting" the argument about price into the UDO's practical‑difficulty standard and agreed with staff that the petitioner had not met the burden. Another member noted safety concerns about drivers looking off the road to read price digits. Members also noted that some existing high signs in the corridor are legal nonconforming and likely to remain in place unless replaced, and staff observed that replacements are often required to be smaller.

After discussion, a motion to deny BZDV‑24‑9290 for failure to meet the practical‑difficulty criterion was made and seconded. The board voted to deny the variance. There was no roll‑call tally in the meeting minutes; the chair announced the motion carried.

The denial leaves QuikTrip without the requested off‑premise highway‑visible price sign; the applicant warned it could delay or halt construction of the proposed store if they cannot obtain the visibility they said is necessary.

The board also suspended its procedural rules earlier in the meeting to address a newspaper‑notice timing issue so that the public hearing could proceed; staff had explained the Indianapolis Star notice was timely under state law but a local publication date had slipped and the BZA voted to waive its internal rule for the case.