Residents urge county to reject plan to trade many small signs for larger, illuminated billboards

Carroll County commissioners heard sustained public opposition on April 16 to proposed zoning changes that would permit consolidation and, in some zones, digitization of nonconforming off‑premise signs (billboards).

County staff and the county attorney opened the public hearing and staff described the proposal as a response to a citizen request that the Planning & Zoning Commission reviewed. The proposed text revisions to Chapter 158 would allow owners of multiple nonconforming off‑premise signs on the same or adjacent parcels in commercial and industrial zoning districts to consolidate them into a single new sign. The rules being proposed would limit a consolidated panel to the lesser of the total square footage of existing signs or 672 square feet per side, cap height at 50 feet, and require the new sign to be within 25 feet of one of the signs being removed. Staff said the county’s registry currently lists 121 registered nonconforming off‑premise signs with an average side of roughly 308 square feet and an average height of about 28.5 feet.

Residents who spoke urged the commissioners to preserve the intent of past master plans—particularly the Finburg corridor plan—which they said envisioned phasing out billboards over time, not allowing larger illuminated structures that would become a permanent presence.

"If as much energy was spent on how to eliminate the signs as went into consolidating them, we might have come up with a plan to eliminate them," citizen David O'Calahan said, asking the county to consider phase‑out timelines and incentives rather than permitting larger signs.

Several commenters said recent code changes that allowed electronic or illuminated conversions already undermined a long‑standing goal to make the signs obsolete. "This bill would reduce the number of billboards, but replace them with massive billboards that would dominate the skyline," said Laura O'Calahan of Finburg, who said the changes would harm tourism and gateway character.

Local resident Michael Davis told commissioners the area had been known for billboards for decades and said 20 years ago the county constrained new off‑premise signs to 32 square feet; subsequent rule changes, he said, permitted LED conversions that made existing billboards larger and brighter.

Representing Clear Channel Outdoor, Kelly Miller urged caution before expecting sign owners to remove structures voluntarily. "These boards are important business assets and personal property," Miller said, adding that the amendment creates an optional pathway for consolidation and does not require owners to apply. She noted the proposal would not increase total square footage on a property and said raising a consolidated sign can reduce vandalism by making panels less accessible.

Planning staff walked commissioners through procedural limits in the draft text—including requirements that consolidated signs comply with site‑distance standards and that removed signs must be taken down within 30 days of occupancy permit issuance, with an affidavit confirming removal. The staff presentation also explained that consolidation eligibility is limited to C1/C2/C3/I1/I2 zoning and that only printed signs are permitted outside those zones (digitization would remain restricted to commercial/industrial districts).

Commissioners asked staff for more precise counts of how many eligible signs sit in specific corridors; several commissioners said they wanted more public feedback on height and size tradeoffs. After discussion, the board voted to conclude the public hearing and keep the record open for 10 calendar days to accept additional comments.

Next steps: The record will remain open for 10 calendar days; the board plans to revisit the amendment after that period with the additional public input and requested data on affected sign counts. No final code change was adopted on April 16.