COM 0454.010 1996-1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Aug-03-98 14 : 01 Sandra Scare 808 334 1930 P _ 03 b' I SIGN ORDINANCE Page 2 - Same section (5) Wall sicfn• " . . •twenty percent of the total exposed area. . .not exceeding 400 sq. ft." If that's not a billboard, 2 don't know what is. See Change 2) : "• • •it will allow projecting and roof signs in agricultural , resort, and multi-family districts, which are presently not allowed." See Change 3) : „Present allowable wall size for these districts ranges from six or thirty-two square feet et nd ad the NO 1ge would allow a wall size of four hundred square - Section 3-6-1 Variances. (page 25) Change ". . .guidelines for granting variances nay be worthy of consideration." I buy that. - Section 3-7-1 Permit fees. (page 26) (b) Why would an applicant for a sign .permit be allowed to erect a sign before the pehe does don't think any sign shouldif be allowed havepay at does not t ha larger a permit. Perhaps this could be amended to include something like: No signs are allowed to be erected prior to obtaining a sign permit. If a sign is illegally erected prior to obtaining a sign permit, and it is within the guidelines,the applicant will pay an application fee of$100 for each sign application. If the sign is not within guidelines, it will he removed as per the sign ordinance. - Section 3-9-1 Nonconforming sign. (Page 31) Included in this section should bee a rnaycnable time limit on how long a pre- existing nonconforming oign is allowed to remain in use. A nonconforming sign should not be allowed to remain indefinitely. - Removal of noncomplying signs. (page 39) (b) ". . .sidewalk or sandwich signs, snipe signs. . ." (1) ". . .when unlawfully erected. . . " No sidewalk or sandwich sign should be permitted at any time. (I don'tknow what a "snipe tier" is, but it doesn't sound like anything I'd want around, cd.thsr, - Removal of noncen.Corming signs. (page 40) Should go further and state a time limit on nonconforming signs. - Article 12. /Callus village Signs. (page 42) (1) So, the Planning Commission isn't supposed to grant variances, the Planning 4 Director can do that. This is the variance thing again. The Kailue Village Design Co eiasion serves only as an advisory board to the Planning Commission. K7DC has advised against variances being granted by the Planning Commission, of which the Planning Director is a part. The Planning Commission, including the Planning Director, has granted •vn iances anyway, and the question has always come up as to why we have a F.ign ordnance in the first place if the Planning Commission end/or Planning Director can overrule the ordinance. (2) says . _ ."responsibility seems to be shared by the Planning and Public Works Department" and goes on to say "if the Planning Director finds the proposed sign to be in compliance with the applicable law. . .the Public works Department shall issue the