Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use And Signage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council advances community-sign amendment; directs legal and planning review after concerns about size and zoning
Summary
The council introduced an amendment to the sign code to allow community-based signs and a permit process, but members raised legal and zoning concerns — especially maximum sign size, off-premise advertising and consistency with existing zoning districts — and directed referral to planning and zoning and legal review before any final adoption.
Taneytown, Md. — The council on May 12 introduced an amendment to the city's sign code intended to allow community-based organizations, sports leagues and nonprofits limited off-premise signage, but members immediately flagged concerns about dimensions, zoning consistency and legal exposure.
The proposed ordinance would permit community organizations to display a set number of signage events subject to permit, set seasons and require permissions for signs placed on city property. During discussion, council members and staff noted several open questions: - Maximum sign size and where larger signs would be allowed (historic downtown vs. residential neighborhoods). - Whether the amendment would unintentionally permit commercial off-premise advertising by defining "community organization" too broadly. - The need to coordinate the amendment with existing zone-by-zone sign-size rules to avoid conflicting standards.
City Manager Jim and other council members suggested several drafting changes: replace fixed large-size allowances with a square-footage cap or dimensional callouts tied to zoning districts; add a sunset or enforcement review; and ensure the provision coordinates with the zoning ordinance, which requires an additional planning commission review because sign rules are a zoning matter.
The council directed staff to refer the draft to the planning and zoning commission for comment, to obtain a legal review of the proposed fees and to rework the size/dimensional language before the item returns to the council. The council majority supported introduction to show intent and keep the item on the legislative radar, but members stressed that the ordinance as introduced needs substantial redrafting.
Public comment following the meeting suggested the city could include noncommercial murals and other downtown beautification measures in future Main Street work. Resident Paul Cluth said a mural could be treated as an exemption or handled through a Main Street program rather than as standard signage.
Ending: Staff will revise the draft to address dimension limits and fee structure, obtain legal advice about fee exemptions for nonprofits, and provide planning-and-zoning recommendations before the council holds a public hearing.
