2007-06 AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE - OFFICE DISTRICT- SIGNS

Home Browse Search

ECONOMIC AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT M MORANDUM Memo No. 07-20 February 14, 2007 TO: Honorable Mayar Paul Osborne and City Council Member FROM: Steve Ga City Manager Greg C. Cr e,Director,Department of Economic &Urba Developme�:.J�� Mark L. Smith, Senior Pl SUBJECT: O-1 Office Sign Amendment SiJMMARY RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the amen ments to Section XXV.E.3.a and Section XXV.E.3.b, relative to signs in the (O-1) Office District b approved as presented and attached. On February 1, 2007, the Plan Commission voted 9-0 to recommend ap roval of the amendments as proposed;the minutes of the meeting are attached. BACKGROITND: Staff has received numerous requests for directi nal and informational signs since the sign provisions of the Zoning Ordinance were adopted. Current y, buildings within the office districts are allowed to have one(1)wall sign located on the main building. he maximum area per sign is 32 square feet, or one-half(1/2) square foot per linear foot of lot fronta e, whichever is greater, to a maximum of 75 square feet. Staff has prepared amendments for inclusion in Section XXV.E.3.a and ection XXV.E.3.b relative to signs in the(O-1)Office District. The specific amendments to Section XXV.E3.a and Section XXV.E.3.b are as follows. SECTION XXV.E.3.a. is proposed to be amended by deleting the restricti n of just "One (1)" sign and adding that there would be"No limit; provided that the aggregate square fo tage of all wall signs does not exceed the maximum square footage as required below." SECTION XXV.E.3.b. proposes to delete "32 square feet or one square foot per each linear foot of occupant frontage, whichever is larger, to a maximum of 75 square feet." nd adds "Ten (10) percent of the facade or wall on which the sign(s) is/are attached, or one (1) square f ot per linear foot of occupant frontage, whichever is larger." After reviewing previous sign requests, Staff believes that the proposed am ndments will provide a more consistent regulatory framework and make the size and location of signs si ilar to those placed or erected in other commercial districts. The amendments would allow, with some restriction,more appropriate sign ge to be placed on more than one facade or wall. POTENTIAL OBJECTIONS: There were no known objectors to the req est. INPUT FROM OTHER SOURCES: There were no comments forthcomi g from any other source. STAFF REFERENCES: If Council members have questions they ma contact Mark Smith, Seniar Planner,424-2790,or at mismith Ndecaturnet.org. BUDGET/TIME IMPLICATIONS: None