Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Signage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission directs staff to draft sign‑measurement changes, considers building‑frontage 1:1 rule
Summary
Commissioners reviewed an updated off‑street parking and signage draft and told staff to produce a revised ordinance that would measure sign entitlement by building frontage (a 1:1 approach), keep a 200‑square‑foot cap on individual signs and revisit strip‑mall definitions at the next meeting.
The Planning and Zoning Commission discussed proposed changes March 5 to off‑street parking requirements and how commercial wall signage should be measured, and asked staff to prepare a draft ordinance for the next meeting.
Staff member (S5) said the large change in the latest draft is a redefinition of “private garage” for multi‑family dwellings and a proposal to measure signage entitlement using building frontage rather than lot frontage. “Right now, my notes say we would look at building frontage as a 1 to 1 measurement,” S5 said, and added that the draft would keep an individual sign cap so “no individual sign would be able to exceed the 200 square feet.”
Staff walked commissioners through local examples — McDonald’s and the Brandon Steakhouse were cited as properties that look different under the frontage approach — and noted some long‑standing variances (BlueRock Square) and uncertain data for a few tenants. Commissioners discussed whether a building‑frontage option should be an either‑or choice (take the greater of building frontage or current lot‑based calculation) to avoid unintended reductions in signage for certain businesses.
Committee members asked staff to revisit the strip‑mall definition to ensure it works with the proposed measurement changes and to return a draft ordinance at the next meeting with clear language and illustrative examples. Staff said it would prepare that draft and expected to schedule the public hearing when several pending amendments and an overlay renumbering are ready.
No final ordinance vote occurred; the item remains in committee for drafting and a future public hearing.
