Springettsbury supervisors debate electronic message centers and temporary sign rules

Marian, the staff presenter, opened the board’s discussion by saying “the lion share of this evening will be on signs,” and then laid out a draft ordinance to add electronic message centers (EMCs) to Springettsbury’s sign code.

The draft would define EMCs (LED/LCD signs that change copy electronically), permit them only as part of monument or marquee signs, limit EMC area (proposed: not more than 50% of a monument sign or 75% of a marquee), require automatic dimming tied to ambient light, prohibit animations and special transition effects, and establish a measurable foot‑candle standard for enforcement. Marian said the technology “exists to program them to automatically dim according to ambient light conditions” and staff proposed objective meter-based compliance checks.

Board members focused on the permissible rate of change for EMC messages. Staff noted the current local interpretation allowed changes as often as every five minutes (and an alternative reading of the code was eight changes per day). In the discussion supervisors cited safety and readability research: an FHWA study was referenced during debate. Opinions varied widely—some board members preferred only a few changes per day, others said minutes (not seconds) make sense. After discussion the board suggested a three‑minute change interval as a practical middle ground and asked staff to return with recommended language and sample regional standards.

The workshop also covered how EMCs should interact with other sign types. Staff recommended EMCs be limited to monument/marquee applications and not combined with other changeable-copy devices on the same site; static messages only would be allowed (no flashing, no animated backgrounds). The draft also included operational details—exact measurement distance and angle for light-meter readings and a worst-case “every diode lit” brightness test.

Temporary and incidental signage were discussed alongside EMCs. Staff proposed permitting A-frame (sandwich) signs with placement and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) protections, formally treating drive‑through restaurant menu boards as a separate incidental sign category (larger permitted size but limited to restaurant drive‑thrus), and counting most window signs toward a tenant’s total allowed sign area. Supervisors raised enforcement concerns: current practice sometimes allows months of temporary signage because of how permits and magistrate cases are processed.

“Enforcement is the reality,” one supervisor said, urging staff to research neighboring municipalities’ approaches. The board asked staff to draft clearer language that balances business flexibility with enforceability, and to examine measurement protocols and district‑by‑district size limits. Staff was asked to return with refined ordinance text and examples at the next workshop slated for late June or early July.

The workshop produced policy direction and several staff assignments but no formal votes or ordinance adoption; the board will review rewritten draft language at a future meeting.