Wednesday, April 25, 2012

Sign Ordinance

The following article appeared in the Almanac and it discusses the recently proposed amendment to the township's zoning ordinance that was designed to allow sponsorship signs at athletic fields. Ideally, the municipality or the various sports associations will be permitted to sell tasteful sponsorship signage at the municipal fields (picture signs on the outfield fence at Dixon). These funds can then be applied to field maintenance and improvements. I think the first proposed amendment has a few problems, but we also need to encourage the commissioners to stay focused on getting the amendment right so that we can capitalize on this much needed source of additional revenue. Mt. Lebanon divided on sign ordinance When Mt. Lebanon Commission President David Brumfield introduced the idea of corporate advertising signs being permitted and regulated in new areas of the municipality, commissioners hoped it would be a source of revenue for Mt. Lebanon. But the Mt. Lebanon Planning Board has concerns about the ordinance, and on March 27, the planning board voted against recommending adoption of the proposed ordinance. At the commissioners April 23 meeting, a public hearing was held that allowed members of the planning board and residents to voice their opinions about the ordinance. The new ordinance permits and regulates internal signs in the Residential-1, Residential-2 and Open Space-Active zoning districts. The ordinance defines internal signs, setback and spacing requirements as well as regulates illumination and maintenance requirements. "I want to commend you for trying to come up with an idea for raising revenue without raising taxes," planning board president Bill Pope told the board. But according to Pope, the new ordinance is contradictory. "You can't have a 10-foot high opaque fence on your private property, but this would allow it on public property," he said. "That was one of the reasons we rejected this ordinance." Pope also cited that the ordinance does not control sign content and that the signs would distract from the green space at Mt. Lebanon fields. He also said Upper St. Clair prohibits similar signs, and said the Upper St. Clair ordinance refers to the signs as "visual clutter." But residents at the public hearing felt differently about the ordinance. "We need this stream of revenue and we have to get creative," resident David Franklin told commissioners. Franklin said Dick's Sporting Goods paid $2.2 million for the naming rights to Dick's Sporting Goods Sportsplex in Graham Park, located in Cranberry Township. "Something like that is tasteful and subdued." The commissioners will vote on the ordinance at the May 8 meeting.

5 comments:

  1. I believe Mr. Pope's comments about the USC ordinance are actually wrong. I believe 130.28.6 of the USC ordinance allows for such signs.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Are there still sponsored tee signs at the golf course? If so, what exception to the zoning ordinance do they fall under?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Dave,
    Can you provide an update on the sign ordinance discussion at last night's meeting? I heard it was approved but was wondering about any
    of the details on how it will be managed...and by whom.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The amendment to the zoning ordinance was approved last night by a vote of 4-1. Matt Kluck was the lone "no" vote. As Commissioner Brumfield noted last night, it will now be necessary to develop a process by which these signs/sponsorships are sold and managed. Personally, I favor a group effort that would maximize the return on this opportunity. As was mentioned last night, it may be that certain individuals are better suited to solicit certain sponsors than the municipal staff. For other sponsors, the opposite may be true. Either way, I personally think it makes sense for the Municipality and the youth sports associations to develop a plan in order to maximize the return. The same would be true for the tennis organizations should theybwish to solicit sponsors.

    Also, contrary to what has been stated elsewhere, I think the funds received through such sales should stay with the municipality for field maintenance and improvements. Given the restrictions that will be attached to these signs I think it would be very difficult to allow the youth sports associations to each individually try and manage seasonal sign campaigns. I think the youth sports associations (and the tennis groups) would simply want to ensure that the funds received by the municipality are invested back into the facilities themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thanks for this update David. I believe this is great news.

    ReplyDelete