Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Signage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission directs staff to rewrite sign code with clearer definitions, setbacks and conditional review option
Summary
Woodstock planning commissioners and residents spent most of the meeting debating a rewritten sign code that would define sign types, add proportional sizing for directory signs, and clarify when signs in the Design Review District require review; staff will redraft language for the next meeting.
The Woodstock Planning Commission spent the meeting focused on a proposed rewrite of the town's sign code, with staff presenting reorganized sections, new definitions, and options for when signs tied to conditional land uses should require additional review. The planner identified in the meeting as "Bridal" described breaking the sign code into discrete subsections and adding definitions for wall, freestanding, projecting, directory and frame signs to make regulations more readable.
"I did reorganize the sign code section into a couple of new discrete subsections," Bridal said, adding that the draft also clarifies that "under statute, any structure created within Design Review District has to undergo a design review," and that the state's definition of structure explicitly includes signs. Commissioners asked staff to redraft language to make it clear which sign types would require administrative versus discretionary review.
Commissioners and public speakers debated whether signs associated with land uses that are themselves conditional should be treated as conditional signs subject to a conditional-use review, or remain permitted and administratively processed. The planner said treating such signs as conditional is "an option" the commission should consider; several members favored leaving most signs as permitted to allow administrative review in routine cases while using conditional review or waivers for unusual circumstances.
The draft retains a maximum directory-sign area (50 square feet in the current draft) but staff and attendees discussed proportionality alternatives that scale sign area to building frontage and still cap absolute size. For small sidewalk signs (A-frame/sandwich boards) the draft proposes an 8-square-foot-per-side limit, a point that drew mixed reactions. Commissioners also pressed staff to add permitting requirements (photos or a scaled mock-up) showing that proposed signs will not obstruct snow removal, sight-lines or utility maintenance.
The commission did not vote on final language. Chair (Speaker 6) asked staff to incorporate the audience's feedback and prepare revised text for the next meeting; members discussed moving the draft to a public hearing once outstanding procedural language is finalized.
