03/07/2017 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The Supreme Court Reed decision has broad implications on local sign ordinances nationwide, in that most local sign ordinances contain some level of sign regulation based on content, and interpretations of the full impacts of the decision are still evolving. Although some localities in Florida have revised their sign ordinances following the Reed decision, most local ordinances have yet to be revised. The City of Sebastian has begun some incremental changes (i.e., to address political signs), but otherwise local ordinances in this county and region are pending revision. Regarding Indian River County's sign ordinance, the County's regulations currently contain a number of sign defmitions that are based on content, and the County's ordinance makes distinctions in its regulation of temporary signs that appear to be inconsistent with the Supreme Court Reed decision. Those distinctions include regulation of political campaign signs differently than other types of temporary signs. At the Board of County Commissioners' July 5, 2016 meeting, Commissioner Peter O'Bryan raised the issue that the County's sign ordinance needs to be reviewed and revised in light of the Supreme Court Reed decision. The Board agreed and directed staff to revise the ordinance, particularly LDR Section 956.15, Regulations for temporary signs requiring permits (see minutes, Attachment 3). Staff' has since reviewed the County's sign regulations in coordination with the County Attorney and has drafted proposed amendments narrowly focused on content -neutral items (see Attachment 5 to this report). Staff is now presenting those proposed amendments to the Board for consideration. Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendations At a public hearing opened at a December 8, 2016 meeting and continued to a January 26, 2017 meeting, the County Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC) considered the proposed ordinance (see minutes, Attachment 4 to this report). At the December 8, 2016 meeting, PZC members reviewed the proposed revisions presented at that time and provided comments and recommendations, summarized as follows: • Temporarysigns on construction sites: revise to require a separation distance from easements (as well as rights-of-way); allow signs closer to property line's (10 foot setback instead of 20 foot setback); and accommodate a sign for a small developer/builder who owns fewer than 10 lots in a subdivision. Staff revised the initial draft to address these issues. • On -premises yard or window signs (such as/including_ political signs): during periods of election, allow one sign per each candidate, issue, or topic on an election ballot rather than a set limit such as a maximum of 4 signs per lot or parcel; allow opportunity for more signs on parcels with extensive road frontage than allowed on standard sized lots. Staff revised the initial draft to address this item. • Regulations for active subdivision or real estate development: in addition to allowing one sign for each authorized agent representing 10 or more lots within a development, allow signage for an agent representing less than 10 lots. Staff revised the initial draft to address this item. • Temporary signs of limited geographic scope and number (permit exempt) consider allowing display of such signs for more days per year so as not to constrain frequent use of signs for real estate sales (e.g., off -premises signs for open houses). To address this comment, staff changed the initially proposed 18 day sign display cap to 24 days, which allows more opportunity for off - premises display of such signs but retains a cap to deter proliferation and clutter. At its January 26, 2017 meeting, the PZC concluded its public hearing and voted 5-0 to recommend that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the proposed (revised) ordinance with some suggestions to staff to consider adding certain details. Since the January 26 meeting, consistent with suggestions P189