04/17/2000 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

NORTH OLMSTED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF THE PUBLIC HEARING APRIL 17, 2000 Present: Council President Saringer, Council Members Limpert, Gareau, Nashar, McKay, O'Grady, Kasler, Miller Also Present: Finance Director Copfer Council President Saringer called the public hearing to order to discuss Ordinance No. 2000-12, an ordinance creating a new and revised Chapter 1163 of the Zoning Code entitled "Signs." Audience Participation Council Nashar said the BZD Committee had met earlier in the evening to discuss the ordinance and one of the recommended changes is to 1163.26, Ground Signs, Section C: "No ground sign shall exceed 50 square feet in total sign face area, nor 12 feet in height as measured from either (1) ground level at the property line nearest the sign; (2) the ground level at the sign, whichever is higher, except that ground signs no more than 8 feet in height shall not exceed 65 square feet in total sign face area." Roy Garland, 4576 Camellia, representing the Chamber of Commerce, said the National Sign Code talks about windshield visibility at the 8 to 12 foot level. Pat Graham, 26100 Lorain Road, representing Great Northern Dodge and the Chamber of Commerce, asked if a sign is not visible from the right-of--way is it regulated by this ordinance. Law Director Gareau said at the last BZD meeting the issue of internal signs was discussed. For example, at the mall or shopping center, there could be something on the back of the building that is not visible from the right-of--way and that would not qualify as a sign. Mr. Graham said he did not see the difference between a pole sign and a ground sign other than talking about a height restriction. Mr. Zimmerman, the city's consultant, said what this ordinance is intended to indicate is that, as soon as a message area of any sign that rises from the ground overhangs its base by more than 20% of its breadth, it is immediately considered as a pole sign. Mr. Graham said he would like to renew the objection to the ban on pole signs based on the definitions. Also, the Chamber has a major concern with the definition of "alter." Mr. Zimmerman said there might be confusion with the language. It is not intended to say a person can't replace a sign face board, maintain it or maintain it for the use or purpose with some incidental changes. It is intended to trigger only when those changes are changes in use or significant changes in copy, color or design that effectively make it a new sign. Mr. Graham questioned the definitions of the erecting a sign, painting a sign and maintenance. Mr. Graham questioned the time frame of the issuing of permits and raised an objection to the bond for the cost of the sign. He voiced a concern regarding "non-conforming signs" as to