Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Signs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission forwards comprehensive Fairmont sign code rewrite to city council
Summary
The Fairmont Planning Commission voted unanimously April 15 to forward a repeal-and-replace of Article 5.3 (signs and similar structures) to city council with a minor structural amendment. Staff said the draft reduces complexity, adds a heritage‑sign category, exempts most window signage, and keeps permit fees unchanged.
Get email alerts on the Zoning Signs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Fairmont Planning Commission voted unanimously April 15 to forward PC26‑02 — a full repeal and replacement of Article 5.3 (Signs and similar structures) — to city council with a small amendment to Section 5.3.8.
Shay, the planning director, told commissioners the rewrite reduces the current sign code from about 20 sections to 12, aiming to speed permitting and make standards easier for residents, businesses and sign contractors to follow. "Window signs will no longer require a sign permit," Shay said, adding the change includes a 30% coverage limit for exempt window signage. Shay also announced that barber poles will be legalized under the new code and described clearance rules to comply with Americans with Disabilities Act design standards.
The draft creates a new heritage‑sign category to allow preservation and maintenance of historic painted or mounted commercial signs; those approved as heritage signs would be kept in a registry maintained by the planning department. The rewrite also simplifies nonconforming‑sign rules, clarifies prohibited signs (for example, mechanically activated moving signs and certain digital animation), and standardizes how sign area and height are measured.
Staff said permit fees will not change; under current fee structure a sign permit costs $25 plus $1 per square foot. Shay told the commission that exempting routine window signs is likely to significantly reduce the number of sign permits processed, which staff and business owners welcomed.
Commissioners agreed to a single technical amendment — shifting a sentence on pole‑sign location into its own subsection — and voted to forward the revised text to city council for consideration. The commission recorded the motion and carried the roll call vote unanimously. Next steps: city council will consider PC26‑02 with the commission’s amendment; the planning staff will post the final materials online.

