Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Proposed Changes to Sign Ordinance <br /> <br />April 29, 1992 <br /> <br />Page 3 <br /> <br />ISSUE: <br /> <br />Roof Signs <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />EXISTING ORDINANCE: <br /> <br />The current ordinance prohibits roof signs. The issue of wall signs extending beyond the roof line is <br />addressed in the Placement of Signs Section. <br /> <br />PRINCIPLE BEHIND EXISTING ORDINANCE: <br /> <br />Roof signs are not wanted in the City due to aesthetic and safety issues. Wall signs that extend over a roof <br />line are considered roof signs. <br /> <br />PROBLEM WITH EXISTING ORDINANCE: <br /> <br />Although signs that extend over the roof line are considered roof signs, this provision is included in a <br />separate section called "Placement of Sign". It is unclear that this type of sign is prohibited. <br /> <br />PossmLE SOLUTION: <br /> <br />Change definition of roof sign to state "any sign erected upon or projecting above the roof line of a <br />structure to which it is affIXed". Leave unchanged provision that prohibits roof signs. <br /> <br />PRINCIPLE BEHIND SOLUTION: <br /> <br />By including in the roof sign definition language regarding signs projecting over the roof line, it is much <br />clearer that this type of sign is prohibited. <br />