HomeMy WebLinkAboutSign Ordinance Comments 11-22-11 22 November 2011 17-et
l2 - (
Carmel Sign Ordinance
Chamber Comments
The Chamber's involvement with the sign ordinance rewrite is predicated on our belief that
strong businesses,make strong communities. One needn't look far to find myriad examples of
the impact business development has had, and continues to have, on our city's quality of life.
While Carmel's businesses understand'the importanceiof regulation- they are not lobbyists for
billboards- signage is a crucial part of their ability to market themselves and to assist their
clients and customers in finding their company or store. Consequently, from the beginning, our
four major goals have remained:
1. Make the ordinance business-user friendly.
2. Make it clear and simple so as.to avoid subjectivity, inconsistent decision-making
and allow businesses to more easily obtain-signage.
3. Make the process easier and quicker by allowingapproval from the Department of
Community Services when signs that-comply with the ordinance are submitted.
4. Make the playing field reasonably level, so that businesses in one area of the city
have similar opportunities of those in others.
The Chamber's areas of disagreement with the proposed ordinance fall into one or more of those
major tenants and are listed below.
• 25.07.01-03 Administration and Enforcement, Letter D
o Recommend deletion or simplification. It,says you cannot put up a sign or tell
someone else to do so without a permit from DOCs. Why not say that?
• 25.07.01-06 Prohibited.Signs, Letter C
o Recommend change to,simply state that off-premise signs are illegal.
o Letter E -Definitions of flashing, blinking; animated or audible. This intent here
appears to be to prohibit all electronic signs, excepting when used by the city.
The definition is difficult to follow. Two things to consider: One, the technology
is changing rapidly; for example, drive-through menus are being replaced by
electronic menus to allow for changes. They don't flash and they will not create a
driving hazard. One way signs and other traffic signals are also using technology
to allow for changes throughout the day(one way at certain times; two-way
others, etc.).
o Letter L-Recommend change to "It is prohibited to utilize a vehicle to function
solely as a sign," or something similar. We believe this to be too detailed,
unnecessary and difficult to enforce (measuring 150 feet?).
• 25.07.01-07 Legal Non Conforming.Signs,-Letter A
o While we agree with the spirit and intent of this, it's been part of the current
ordinance for some time and has not been enforced due, as we understand it, to
the amount of administrative work associated with it. Our belief is to either
actually do what the ordinance says, or remove it from the ordinance.
• 25.07.02-04 Multi-Tenant Buildings- Letter B, 1 (a)
o Letter G, 1 - Drop box signage, like vending machine signage, is uncontrollable.
Donation drop boxes arrive with applied names and logos.
o Letter I, 1 —Requiring ADLS Amendment approval and temporary use permits in
our opinion is unnecessary additional bureaucracy for businesses and retail land
owners attempting to make philanthropic donations.
o Presumably, rules regarding event directional signage would be identical for city-
related events.
• Sign Charts Freeway and Non-Freeway
o Our preference would be to utilize equations in these sections so simplify the
chart and make it easier to determine what's allowable particularly when signs are
on the side of a building (necessitating determination of proper viewing angle).
• How to Get a Sign Materials
o While not a part of the ordinance, we would suggest a user-friendly, simplified
procedure document to replace the current "Procedure for Sign Approval." A
proposal example is attached.
•