Lorain planning staff opens hearing on proposed change to allow pole and off‑premise signs in industrial districts

City planning staff opened a May 7 public hearing to present an ordinance that would amend the Lorain zoning code to permit pole signs and certain off‑premise and electronic changeable message signs in light‑industrial (I‑1) and heavy‑industrial (I‑2) districts.

Planning staff said the proposal would add language to Chapter 4‑21, Section 11‑51.06 (Permitted Signs by District) and to the associated signs‑by‑district table to allow regulated pole signs, off‑premise billboards and electronic changeable message signs for marketing and advertising in B‑2, I‑1 and I‑2 districts. “Since pole signs are not permitted, they are expressly prohibited for our code,” the staff presenter said, explaining that the ordinance would create exceptions and mirror the sign and electronic standards already applied to B‑1 and B‑2 commercial districts.

The change responds to a recent application in which an applicant sought a pole sign and related on‑premise advertising at a property located in an industrial district; the applicant’s request was not permitted under current code language, staff said. Planning staff also referenced a letter dated April 14 from attorney Don Saleski about a previously approved sign at a Stanley storage facility and said the matter was brought back for further consideration.

Staff said the recommendation stems in part from a retail development training attended by staff, the city service director Carrie Ann and outside stakeholders in Birmingham, Alabama, where presenters noted that stricter sign rules can hinder retail and commercial development. Staff proposed to allow pole and electronic signs in I‑1 and I‑2 districts while prescribing the same standards now used in B‑1 and B‑2 districts. For example, staff described maximum sign face areas of 75 square feet (with a 100 square‑foot allowance cited for industrial parcels) and a limit that up to 50 percent of a sign face may be used for changeable electronic message content; staff said those numeric limits were adopted previously when the comprehensive plan and sign code standards were set.

Staff also identified a particular intersection—Root Road and Colorado Avenue—where existing sign poles already stand at three corners of the intersection and said permitting a new pole sign there would not create an unusual streetscape condition. The proposed text would add an explicit exception for off‑premise billboards and for electronic changeable message signs in specified districts and provide a process for the zoning board of appeals to consider roof signs under a separate subsection.

No board vote was taken at the hearing. After staff presentation, the chair opened the floor for questions and public comment; a board member asked whether the 50 percent changeable‑message area standard is commonly used elsewhere, and staff replied the figure mirrors existing B‑1/B‑2 standards adopted previously by the city. No public commenters registered for this matter during the hearing.

The planning commission meeting packet contains the proposed ordinance text, a redline showing additions, and the April 14 correspondence from attorney Don Saleski. If the planning commission recommends approval, staff said, the ordinance would proceed to city council for final action.