5/7/1986 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MAY 7 1966 BOOK 64 PA; 3?2 I TO: The Honorable Members DATE: April 21, 1986 FILE: of the Board of County Commissioners DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: lid SUBJECT: PROPOSED SIGN ORDINANCE Robert M. Keati , A Planning & Devel Dm Director FROM: Art Chal ar combe Sign Ordinance Chief, Environmental PlJRFFrJjRENCES: DIS: BOB It is requested that the data presented herein be given formal consideration by the- Board of County Commissioners at their regular meeting on May 7, 1986. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: s On September 24, 1985,planning staff received the draft of the proposed sign ordinance from the County's consultant. This revision of the sign code is one part of the County's-- overall effort to, update ..,the entire zoning code. Although the sign ordinance is -incorporated within the. General Provisions Section (Section 25) of the zoning code, no changes were made to the sign ordinance when the general provisions section was revised in 1985. Because of the complexity and the controversial nature of sign - regulation, the staff decided to address the sign issue separate- ly. On March 27, 1986, after two public hearings on'thisordinance, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the proposed sign ordinance. Subsequent to the meeting, staff revised the proposed ordinance to reflect the word changes proposed by the Commission. A minor modification of the ordinance that was not presented at the public hearing is within the definition of "abandoned sign" where staff recommends a, one hundred eighty day period before a sign is considered abandoned. The previous definition called for a one hundred twenty day period. The purpose of the proposed sign ordinance is to promote and protect the public health, safety and aesthetics of the County by regulating the posting, display, erection, use and maintenance of signs, billboards, and other advertising structures. With respect to signs advertising busines-s uses, it is specifically intended to avoid excessive proliferation and clutter among sign displays competing for public attention. The existing sign ordinance is inadequate for the following reasons: 1) The ordinance regulates signs on the basis of individual business uses rather than a per site basis, resulting in an unnecessary proliferation of signs; 2) the sign definitions within the present ordinance are incon- sistent with definitions used within the industry. This makes the ordinance difficult to follow, interpret, and administer. 3) size requirements for signs in the present ordinance are inconsistent with the actual need. The proposed ordinance addresses these concerns by more specif- ically identifying the regulatory procedures and standards associ- ated with different types of signs. In some cases the proposed sign ordinance may reduce the number, type, and size of signs allowed on a parcel, while in other instances the new regulations will allow even more signage than permitted by the present code. 36