posted
As of the first of the year, our city re-ordinanced its entire sign program. One that really hurts is a side setback of 10 feet. They let commercial building build to zero clearance on sidelines, so why not signs? Many business fronts require drivelanes and parking lots in front of their buildings. I actually lost two great jobs this weeks to this ordinance, because the customer could not afford the space loss. By ordinance, a business can only have one attached, and one detached sign, so this is leaving them and us with a big hurdle. Of course everything prior to January, is grandfathered in. Another question I have: Has any of you ever taken opposition to such ordinances with city officials, and how did you proceed? Our sign permits all went to $50, even for posters, and special use sign requests to $250.00 (non refundable) so we are reluctant to even ask for a variance permit. Thanks for any info....Bronzeo
------------------ Jack Davis 1410 Main St Joplin, MO 64801 www.imagemakerart.com bronzeo@prodigy.net http://www.imagemakerart.com
Posts: 1549 | From: Joplin, MO | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Different requirements in varied zones is normal. Downtown buildings should have fronts with windows right to the sidewalk, and have projecting signs over the right of way that often go 2/3 of the width of a sidewalk.
Zones with strip development (parking lots in front) have different needs. Traffic is faster. They often divide the allowable sign area between a sign on the building and one on a pole by the road.
An ordinance that gets hit with several applications for variences will be soon changed, because they'll see that something is not working. If they don't get the varience app's, they assume it works. They don't respond to merchant grumblings. Yhat's the way the system changes itself.
------------------ The SignShop Mendocino, California "Where the Redwoods meet the Surf"
Posts: 6718 | From: Mendocino, CA. USA | Registered: Nov 1998
| IP: Logged |
That was the 10ft. setback used to be the norm for all of our B-zone properties. The problem was that most of those properties were in the downtown area and the building facades were already 10ft or less from the property line. You can imagine what it did to the sign business and business in general.
The city's excuse was that signs within the 10ft property line would potentially block the view of oncoming traffic when pulling out of a driveway. The compromise was to put in a driveway site distance triangle.
The site distance triange measures 10ft back from the driveway entrance and 70ft parallel with the street. Connect those two points and you have the setback requirement. As long as the sign was behind the triangle, everybody got what they needed - visibility and safety.
As for temporary signs, gee, I thought we were bad. Our little town of 45,000 people has a $100 permit fee requirement for temporary signs including banners. The fun thing is that the permit fee for most permanent signage is about $35.
posted
I disagree with Rick's assesment that an ordinance that gets hit with variance applications gets changed any faster. What I see happening is that the variance proceedure becomes "due course". The zoning board complains about "overwork" to the politicians, who increase the budget and hire more people to handle the workload, all of which was caused by a poorly-written ordinance to begin with. What once was a simple $50 permit is now hundreds of dollars in application fees for variances, plus the legal fees incurred by the municipality to defend their ordinance. All the incentive in this type of system goes to propagate, not simplify itself.
Complaining to a zoning official about a bad ordinance is like complaining about the tide coming in. Get the ear of your elected officials, with the help of a few of your less complacent customers, and agitate for a hearing on the ordinance. Keep at it until you get one; but make sure you don't alienate the bureaucrats who actually issue permits, or they can make your life miserable.
------------------ "A wise man concerns himself with the truth, not with what people believe." - Aristotle
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro. - Raoul Duke (Hunter S. Thompson)
Cam Finest Kind Signs 256 S. Broad St. Pawcatuck, Ct. 06379 "Award winning Signs since 1988"
Posts: 3051 | From: Pawcatuck,Connecticut USA | Registered: Nov 1998
| IP: Logged |
posted
I normally send the customer to the city for a permit beforehand, this gives the owner of the property or the leasee a first hand knowledge of what the city will allow him to have, and an understanding of what we have to go through to get a permit. Its amazing what the customer can get authorized compared to what you can get with the same visit. Time and again I have had the city guy call me and authorize something that is out of code. The main thing they want is to know what is going on and to keep the city looking as nice as possible and safe as possible. Window signs and temporary signs, like political posters are not covered, except by state law on political ones, They cannot be placed in the highway right-of-way Bill
------------------ Bill & Barbara Biggs Art's Sign Service, Inc. Clute, Texas, USA Home of The Great Texas Mosquito Festival Proud second year Supporter of the Letterheads Website MailTo:twobeesusa@netscape.net
Posts: 1020 | From: Lake Jackson,Tx | Registered: Nov 1998
| IP: Logged |
posted
A neighboring township in our area requires a $100.00 fee to apply for a variance (non-refundable). I was concerned that my customer would be throwing his money away, since the placement of his sign would be 4 ft. closer to the road than the ordinance permits, so I brought up my concern with the building inspector. He told me that it would pass without a problem, since almost every sign in the township has had to apply for a variance, and he's never heard of one denied! I feel that many small townships use these ordinances as a profit making venture (although that is clearly against the law). Not much we can do about it, though. This same township is known for its various "speed traps" also, and has just had it's police dept. investigated for inpropriaties! You think big cities are bad?
------------------ Tim Whitcher Quality Signs & Design 107 E Adrian St Blissfield, MI 49228 qualitysigns@cass.net
Posts: 1546 | From: Adrian, MI | Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yer Lucky we have a 25'setback in C-2 zoning but 0 setback in C-1 I was once refused a sign on a commercial property because the building was only 24 feet back from property line .We had a few words over that one and the sign inspector actually got fired...of course it took some prodding and a couple of letters ...oh and I did get the guy a sign (how stupid can a city official get)did I mention the MAYOR WAS A FRIEND OF MINE
------------------ Monte Jumper SIGNLanguage/Norman.Okla.
posted
The sight triangle and front setbacks, I don't have a single problem with. I think they need to be strictly enforced for traffic saftey. I don't have a problem with the restrictions or elimination of portable signs, (or at least to keep them used as 30 day temporary and behind setbacks) as I find them extremely unattractive and obtrusive to neighboring businesses. I think abandoned and unkept signs should be removed at the owners expense. What I can't see is a special use fee going from 75.00 to 250.00 non refundable. We are allowed one attached and one detached sign, plus on poster, per business. The 10 foot side setback on an inbound lot can only be functional to serve as a barrier from the neighboring lot. The ordinance serves to protect each neighbor sight easment but at the same time restricts their advertising needs to an unfair level.
------------------ Jack Davis 1410 Main St Joplin, MO 64801 www.imagemakerart.com bronzeo@prodigy.net http://www.imagemakerart.com
Posts: 1549 | From: Joplin, MO | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic