Signage is covered by zoning or it can be. You have to include signage in the plans most of the time. If the signage isn’t consistent with the zoning rules, then a variance is needed. Landscaping is covered as well and has become increasingly important in places like Aurora that have flooding and run-off issues.

The plans were fairly detailed in terms of the security and the bulletproof glass, so Aurora’s zoning board, if they paid attention, had a pretty good idea of the kind of tenant that was being courted.

The identity of a tenant is very different from the physical features. In the case of Best Buy or Circuit City both have huge signs and almost always need a variance to get approval.

Many of the national developers or those working with locals try and keep their identity separate as long as possible, but if they need variances, they almost always lose that ability.

Heck of a world we live in then. Why bother asking the questions at all during the process?

That’s for the court to decide.

The decision above is pretty consistent with most state rulings on such matters and other federal rulings. The permit application could not have been acted up differently based upon that information. The information helps when there are variances or zoning changes since at that point Aurora could exercise some judgment over whether to grant the variances. In a case where no variance is required, the identity of tenants is largely irrelevant.

If everything was above board and correct, they should be fine with that.

OneMan