Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

You should be good. I'd like to call to order the Concord Temp Township Zoning Commission for Tuesday, September 2nd, 2025. Uh, call to order. Pledge of Allegiance. If you would stand and join with me the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. Oh, that's a I'm sorry.

I alian to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Heather, roll call. Roll call, please. Mr. Schindler, present. Mr. Eeliss here. Mr. Peterson here. Mr. Teryako here. And Mr. Rert

here. Next on the agenda is approval of minutes. We have none, so we'll jump over that. Correspondence. Frank, do you have any correspondence? None, Mr. Chairman. Ron, no, I do not. Okay, Rich, nothing. Thank you. Rich, I had nothing either, Mr. Chairman. And I had nothing either. So, correspondence is like two. Zoning inspector report, Heather, please.

Okay. Um, well, good evening. Um, so on the in front of your your seats tonight, you'll see replacement pages that are being provided to you. Um these are need to go into your zoning resolutions. These updates are effective on September 5th, 2025. Um this is based on the trustees who voted to um adopt your recommendation for all the nine zoning text amendments that just went through the public hearing process. Um so those pages are there for you. Um the township has started off started their comprehensive plan update. staff held their kickoff meeting with the planning consultants MS consultants last month and they held their first steering committee meeting last week as well. We do have a community openhouse planned for September 16th from 5:30 to 7:30. It's going to take place at fire station number one. Um I'll probably I just got late today from our consultants. We have a website that was put together and a survey that was done. Um we're going to make that go live probably tomorrow. So I'll probably send that out to everybody. there's um that's an easy way to participate. Um and then we'll have other um other opportunities to participate in the process as well as we move through this.

It's September what? September 16th. It's a Tuesday. That's it. 16th one six. Yeah.

Two weeks. Okay. Okay. And um just a quick update on the August zoning permit activity report. Last month we processed 32 zoning permit applications. Um the vast majority of the permits were for residential projects, nine new accessory buildings, nine new dwelling units, six fences, three accessory structures, two additions for residential homes, two new decks, and two new businesses. Um the new businesses um include the Great L Great Great Lakes Automotive which is a business that's going to provide automotive repair. It's located on Ravena Road right next door to Concord Collision. It was the former um electrical contractor's building there. And then another new business called Azika and they provide music editing services and they'll be located on Auburn Road in the Normandy uh complex there just north of the roundabout. Uh quick update on the BZA. They had a couple variance applications that were approved in um August. One of them was for residential property who wanted to have a 6ft tall fence that projected into the front yard along the side property line um instead of the maximum 4ft tall. That was approved. And then there was a home in in a residential district as well who was granted a variance to allow them to construct a covered front porch. Um their house was already at the minimum 50ft building setback line. They wanted to add an 8ft covered porch off the front. Um and that variance was approved. So they've had a couple of those front porch variants request. Um they they actually commented that you guys should be aware of that. So, I guess it's good that I'm giving you updates.

So, if we start to see some trends, but that's all I have for now. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Public participation. Boy, is it light today. Uh, anybody on the phone? No, sir.

I don't think so. Okay. I don't think we have any public participation. New business. I have heard you know the package you have in front of you. Heather has a PowerPoint presentation for us. We do not want to go through line by line by line by line but as something comes up we'll discuss it if we can. We may not get through the whole thing tonight. So it might go into next month and the month after. I don't know. We'll see. But uh Heather does have a a uh a presentation. So the floor is yours.

Okay. All right. Thank you. So I did put together some slides here. Um as we discussed, we want to take a look at our existing sign regulations with section XXX30.

Dim the lights a little bit. So Um so the section of the sign code was written by a consultant that the township hired just over a decade ago. It and they put together a steering committee of um township officials as well that helped them come up with the regulations that we currently have. Those regulations became effective March 21st of 2014. About a year later, there was a a US Supreme Court case, Reed versus Town of Gilbert, um that came out that has really got a lot of municipalities and townships looking at their sign regulations. Um and that is part of the reason that we decided to update some of ours. Um, in in this case, uh, in Reed, the Supreme Court invalidated the sign code enacted by the town of Gilbert, Arizona because it was a contentbased regulation of speech. The sign code singled out different types of signs for special treatment, specifying requirements for their size and locations and times when they could be displayed. the the church challenged the sign code as a violation of their freedom of speech under the first amendment. So, this little graphic I found in another presentation kind of shows you like um there were different size requirements based on who the speaker was and different time frames as far as how long signs could be erected depending on what the event was or what the message was on the sign. So what did the the court say? Basically that the that the town's um sign code defined categories based on their messages and that each um category had different restrictions and that it depended entirely on the science communicative content. So it was content based

and um and the court continued to say that it was presumably um unconstitutional um that basically unless the restrictions furthered a compelling governmental interest and then they they would be subject to strict scrutiny. So why do temporary directional signs have a greater threat um to a compelling government interest than like you know aesthetics or traffic than any other kind of sign category. The s the court said that you can still continue to regulate the signs based on time, place, and manner, but not to base it, but the regulations can't be if the regulations are based on the content that it would probably not pass strictly or any kind of test that they would um look at.

So, this was the US Supreme Court, not the Arizona one, correct? Yeah, the state supreme court. It was the US. us. Mhm. And I'm sure Brady knows way more about that. So, I'm just glossing over. So, can we ask since since uh Yeah, since you Brady was kind enough to forward me this when I was asking questions. Yeah. A couple months ago. So, what was Gilbert what was Gilbert found unconstitutional? What did they what was the co when the code did they they regulate tried to regulate what the signs said?

No. So they had different regulations for temporary signs um political signs and what was the third one? Yeah. HOA. HOA. They're called like ideological signs. They actually had these different categories which were exempt from getting a permit. They had to comply with certain things. his was a sign to have church services. He did not have an actual building for his church. So, he had different places where they would have these church services. So, he put them up all over different places. And um it there was um I I don't think the event, if I'm not mistaken, he didn't take it down within an hour after the event, which was a requirement of their sign code.

Okay. And also um did not have the actual date of the event on the actual sign. So, but the sign code ordinance um you know enforcer of of this the town of Gilbert or the village of Gilbert um like cited them a couple of times and said listen we are going to enforce our code and um the the pastor said this is um Mr. read. He said um you are violating my first amendment right to free speech um because you are saying that my sign you know different than all these other signs um you know has to be down within a certain amount of time of the event where you don't do that with other temporary or these kind of signs. So, oh there

it was biased to well I don't know if it was biased but in his in his mind and the US Supreme Court agreed what it was content based so it was based on the content of the sign um instead of some of these other signs that were allowed to be up much longer um or allowed to be bigger signs versus his smaller sign that sort of thing. So that's where in his mind it was, you know, this is a violation of my first amendment right because now you're regulating the content and telling me that the content on the sign is going to regulate and tell us how how big the sign can be and how long it can be up for. Uhhuh. Which is a big no no according to the United States Supreme Court. I see. Okay. Okay. Okay. Thank you.

Sorry, Heather.

Oh, you're fine. So, um, after that, some of the what what folks are saying is that you really when when looking at updating your sign regulations, you really need to consider this rather than considering signs as a land use, consider it as um protected free speech. So, just kind of a new way of looking at it. Um, and some of the best practices after read. These are what all the planning experts and sign code people are kind of saying like make sure your sign regulations include a substitution clause. Make sure it includes a severability clause. Um, make sure your purpose statements are very detailed and at the beginning of your sign regulations. And then also make sure you're minimizing the different categories of your signs. So that those are some of the things that I looked at when we were proposing changes for ours. Um oops. So the first one, the substitution clause, this is what I was proposing to add a new section 30.18. Basically, it just says any permitted commercial message can be substituted with a non-commercial message. And this prevents any kind of inadvertent pre uh preferential treatment um of commercial speech over non-commercial speech. Um and then a severability clause. Um basically if this section of the sign if any section of the sign regulations is found to be unlawful that portion can be removed without invalidating the entire resolution. So, that is the new um what I'm proposing to add to to new sections 30.17.

Not going to read it. It's right there on the slide. Yeah.

Um we also have the packet in front of you. And then we already had a bunch of purpose statements um in here, but I was proposing to modify a couple of them and then add a new one. So, under the purpose statements um looking at updating um 30.0 01 C. Uh, and then add and updating D as well, talking about um allowing businesses to have reasonable and appropriate opportunities to identify their properties and advertise their goods and services while also trying to minimize clutter and distractions um that may be contributing factors with traffic congestion, accidents. And then the last one, um, ensuring that the provisions of the of the section don't infringe on the rights of free speech. Um, just going to paraphrase that one, but so those are three um, new additions to the to the purpose statements. And then minim trying to minimize categories as far as like non-temporary signs. I felt like our zoning resolution did a pretty good job not categorizing. Um but when we got into the temporary signs, we did come across a lot of these. So I, you know, we had um project contractor signs, we had project construction signs, special event signs, um a lot of these real estate signs. We um and the goal was to try to um if you it the goal is like you should should not have to read the sign to know how to regulate the sign. So all of the provisions really should be somewhat the same. Um so that's what I tried to look at and what I was um proposing to do is just update our section 30.09. Um and this is the temporary sign

regulations. So um so the the a new statement that would be added here basically says that some the signs in this section are exempt for the per from the permanent signs and they're not counted towards the total square footage. just to be clear there. Um, but if signs do not meet the standards of the temporary sign se SE section, then they would be subject to permanent sign regulations. So, I what I was proposing to do is split this up into different categories talking about residential districts um and then non-residential districts and then get into some more more specific types of temporary signs. So, for residential districts, now this would all be new because we don't have um we we have different sign allowances for residential signs currently and we're trying to clean that up. So that the idea was that each residential unit would be allowed one or more temporary signs. And those temporary signs could be either in the window of the house or in the yard as a small yard sign or it could be um on on the building like a wall sign. One or more no of no sign should be greater than eight square feet. No taller than four feet. But regardless of how many signed you have out there, the total square footage of the sign face area cannot exceed 12 square ft. As far as location, um it needs to be minimum of 10 ft back from property lines. Now, the location requirement is something we already have for temporary signs and residential districts. The square footage is something new because right now we do not have any square footages for signs. for temporary signs. Um, so these are

kind of these are new standards. Um, and the other thing that's new would be putting a time limit on how long a temporary sign can be up there. And looking at some other communities, um, they had 45 days. So that's where I was starting with. So the temporary sign could be up for 45 days. Um, and then after that 45 days, they can either take it down or they could replace it with another one. Um or or it could turn then if it exceeds that 45 days I guess it it would be subject to the permanent sign regulations. Um and then you would have to look at what are the permanent sign regulations allowances for the residential districts. I did kind of look at what are some standard sizes for temporary signs like

can you go back to that I may please. Yeah. So just find this one. Yeah, which prompted the question a few months ago about this too, right? So, examples of a temporary sign in a residential district other than uh uh an election, an issue or candidate. Um uh what is an what are examples of temporary signs in front of a home? So, I've seen people have like they just had like construction done at their house. So, they'll put the com the construction companies like SOA Construction just did my renovation.

Or they may have um I'm having a yard sale. Here's my my sign promoting my yard sale. Or Heather, what about I have a little sign out there now that I think about it. Ohio State Buckeyes on a little flag. It's in front of my house. That would mean a temporary sign. Yeah. But you leave it up for the whole season. Right. Okay. Now, even Yeah. And so, just so you know, it would be complaint driven regarding time frames. I mean, the signs would have to, you know, with any violation, you know, if I got a call, somebody said that the sign's been out there for 2 years and the zoning resolution says no, no more than 45 days.

Um, I would have to have my own proof that it's more than 45 days. So, I probably have to take a photo and then keep checking, get more evidence, and then if it's past the 45 days, like it should be pretty obvious if it's really been up there 2 years, right? Then I could probably send a letter to the property owner if they were already exceeding the square footage that would be allowed for then even a permanent sign, though, because you are allowed to have a certain amount of permanent signage. And under the current resolution, it can be one up to three square ft and two additional ones at 1 and 1/2 square ft.

So if they decide to keep that one sign in the front yard all year long and it's three square feet, they're allowed to have that. What about if they take it down for a day and then put it back up like staying in a, you know? Yeah, you can play that silly game. You could. Yeah. Uh, another question. So, in a window, um, what if an HOA has rules against that? Yeah. What governs? You have to comply with both.

Yeah. Because I know like the Hunt Club, like they didn't allow any yard signs up until I think the last couple years they started being a little bit more lenient with their residents over there. But we've always allowed, you know, signage and we've always told folks you have to be able to comply with both. So if the HOA is more strict, then you have to follow that. And then most of those signs are really just really just behind the curve. I think it I think we're saying 10 foot setback. Yeah. That's what we currently have. I'm totally open to changing that because I know no one complies with that. I can tell you that right now. They basically have it in the rightway almost. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

So I don't know. Five feet is more realistic to try to shoot for. I mean, not gonna be able to definitely open to, right? We just see it behind Yeah. I mean, behind the curve. I mean, you want to whether you're supporting an issue or a candidate. You want people to see it see as a dry, right? Yeah. True. Heather, what brings you to the 12 square feet for the combined area? How do you calculate? How do you come up with that?

I Right. I just kind of made it up. Right. Well, we had nothing to start with. Right. So, that's where I was looking at. What are the sizes of typical yard signs? Those those small little political signs tend to be like one and a half by two, so about three square feet. So, they could have up to four of those um all year long or up to 45 days for each time they're up. Um I mean, maybe that's too much. Just trying to be generous enough to allow somebody who might want to do something larger. Yeah. Um but that one the largest it could be is eight square feet. You could do an eight and then a four and have your two or whatever.

Just curious how you come up with the It might be way too much. I mean like I was kind of driving around a little bit like just looking at homes and I'm like hardly anyone has signs up just on a regular day basis, you know? But Right. Um, but I think this is an important for our community. Yeah. Bedroom community. This is an important one. This temporary signs. If I hear people complain or ask questions, it's always about signs. Yeah. It's always about signs in yards, windows, mailboxes or mail posts, I should say. Off the post. Well, that maybe that's not a 10%. That's a banner.

That's a banner. Yeah. Like the flags that they put on the mailboxes like Rich's Ohio State flag. Oh, not it's actually in front of the house. Little wire thing that it ts down and blows in the wind. Yeah. Neighbors with the Yeah. Ohio State's flag is not there all all season long. I know there are some mailboxes that are like that and technically those are all in the rightway, but we've never really addressed that or enforced. Yeah. I don't think anybody finds it objectionable, right? I don't think so. I think it's mainly other types of signs that stay around forever.

Well, there's a guy when you come up the street down here that's got the uh browns his his mailbox is painted. His paint the bronze colors, you know. His mailbox and the post and everything is Yeah. Yeah. Just the browns. Well, the ones you complain about are the ones that aren't taken down. They aren't taken down. Right. But this will have the time frame on it and it's but it's complaint driven. It would likely be completely has to be. Okay. But but like I stated that the 12 square feet, the 10 foot setback, these are all things that we can discuss further. If you guys want to Okay. Um look at different numbers, we can definitely do that.

Okay. Thank you. Okay. Um, if I can get back to the slides real quick. Okay. Oh, but I had kind of looked at what are some of the yard typical sizes of some of these signs that that people do and um just in case you guys were wondering what the the standard sizes are in some of those. So, I just had a quick slide in there. What's the What's the top one? I can't read it. Oh, the top one is a 3x8 banner. How many square feet? That's a 24 square foot banner.

Like um I I know we have some of the some churches that tend to do larger banners when they're promoting events. Um we don't see a lot of banner usage. Usually it's smaller signs. Um but continuing on with the temporary signs then also in section 30.09 09 for the non-residential uh I think that would um let me check real quick. Sorry. Yeah, for temporary signs and non-residential districts um so when you have a lot that is developed um they can have one or more temporary signs um combined square footage not to exceed 16 square ft. Um maximum height six feet and set back 10 minimum set back of 10 feet. Um and again these could be or these are the the freestanding signs and wall signs. So it could either be on the building or in the yard. Um now these are new numbers as well because we did not have any size restrictions. We currently regulate special events in the commercial districts and we have very specific language about allowing businesses to promote a special event.

Um up to they can advertise for their special event no more than 45 days in a calendar year. Um but there's no size of the sign that it's um that is in there. No height restrictions. I think it has a 10 foot step back though and that's it.

So with this we are trying to come up with um some kind of standard. Then we have the temporary window signs which we already kind of regulate temporary window signs and permanent signs are kind of grouped together. Essentially you can't cover more than 50% of the window area in most of the zoning districts. And then like in the town hall commons district um it's limited to 25 or 10% of the the sign of the window area. I kept all of that the same. I didn't make any changes to any of those restrictions. Um another kind of new section again under temporary signs in the non-residential districts are these banner type signs. So, one thing that I read that a lot of people were recommending is when you should allow banner signs to be used when you have new businesses coming in that are taking over vacant spaces where they might already have a sign, but they don't they can't get their new sign fabricated. So, this new section would allow them to put that same size sign to basic essentially cover the old sign um for no more than 90 days or um or whenever the new sign, the permanent sign is installed. And then also something new though would be allowing um them to use non-residential land owners to use the the banner sign um for to for for for another purpose, not for an interim. We're just covering this temporarily, but that would essentially allow them to promote whatever they want. Um one banner up to 32 square feet. um maximum height for up to four times a year with each event no more than 30 days at a time. Now, that's a pretty significant change from what we have now. So, maybe that that might be too much. I don't know. Um we can talk about that, but cuz right now we have like one

no more than 45 days. You can spread that out over whatever number of events you want

with no size restrictions. Um now with this this would give basically non-com uh the non-residential district um more time throughout the year to potentially advertise for what we also have regulations uh about sandwich board signs. This is another type of temporary sign. We currently already have some regulations in there. One would be permitted per business or tenant. It should be located within five feet of the entrance to the business and then providing some maximum height and with um size guidelines. Um and then a new statement stating that it can be displayed only only basically when the build when the business is opened.

Now we have we have some of these regulations already on on the books. Mhm. Some of them are new. Yep. How is the store owner going to know the difference when he puts his banner out that's bigger than what we allow? So, right now in non-residential districts, they are supposed to come and get a temporary sign permit before they put the sign up.

Okay. Um, and we would propose to still have that same process where they should come in and get the temporary sign permit. But even leading up to that, you know, we can let the community know if if we adopt new standards, what those standards are. Um, we can I can talk to different business owners, let them know. More than often not, they're they're calling and asking, "Well, what are the sizes?" I even get calls from real estate agents, what size sign are we allowed to put over there? Um, but we can communicate that with um the businesses. The way I'm thinking is if you go down to Spats or Yeah.

the one right next to it, whatever it is, and they have a a sandwich board already made up that they put out and it's bigger than this. Mhm. So, they put it out again. Uhhuh. And it's in violation. Well, Do they actually have one? Oh, I don't know. Oh,

okay. I'm just curious. I know Remix kind of uses one, but they don't use it correctly. They put it in the rightway. Um, but I'm trying to think who actually uses one. If it truly is like an A-frame, Tframe sandwich board sign. It should fall within those size sign regulations. I mean, I can do more research on that and make sure, but and if it's a sign that was existed prior to the resolution being updated, then it would be nonconforming. However, I don't know with the sandwich board that it would be. I I not sure. I'd have to look at that. Well, whatever. Yeah. Probably nobody's going to complain. I don't think so. They're used to seeing that sandwich poured out there, right? Yeah.

Right. And it should be a st a pretty standard size. So, well, I don't think there's too many that are obnoxious. So, all right. It's better to have the the size restrictions in there. Yes. Rather than not having them because someone could get

really carried away with that and fabricate like a really large A-frame type sign and and you know, still try to use it in accordance with the regulations. if you don't have a a size requirement in there. Um, and then even vacant parcels need to be able to have signage. So, so temporary signs on a vacant parcel. What I'm proposing is you could have one per parcel, maximum 40 square feet, maximum height six feet. Uh if you're on a corner lot um and of at least 300 foot of frontage, you could have a second additional sign being no larger than 32 square feet. Um and then okay, signage. So this signage during construction. So, say you have a construction site um and they need to put signage up. This would allow them to have one um sign no larger than 32 square feet at each entrance to the to the site. Um maximum height 6 ft and then it should be removed upon the project being completed or the occupancy of the um the building. I've seen, speaking of construction signs, the development is half a mile away and they put it on the telephone pole post coming into the one of the streets coming down to the development right up here where I get seen moment the development that's being built, you know.

Oh, the Ivy Ridge. Thank you. Yeah, that that's How do you stop that from happening? Well, I can't stop everything from happening, but No, I just saying I just noticed that they put the sign way up the street, for example, next to a telephone pole. Matter of fact, they had it on the telephone pole for a while. Yeah. Nailed on to the telephone pole. Yeah, we find that all the time. People put signs in the rightway of the of the road and on poles and but this one here is is a development a developer who's building a complex. Yeah. And you got that sign sitting down there could take months and months and months to complete.

I'm sorry. Is this advertising the development or is it home? This is about a sign during construction. It's not not them. It's actually the developer himself. Then not a sign during construction. It's a It's just it's a py sign, right? It's advertising. No, it's the one that's on now old road. No, at Cry and Hunting Lake. No, can't think of it now. Well, the the ones the ones that I've seen advertise a development,

right? whether it be PE or whoever it may be or Brian or whoever and it says this way or what and it's on pole or those aren't permitted. No, they're not permanent but they're there more than 45 days. Well, so what happens with those those Ryan homes like they hire sign companies to come out and they put those signs up like essentially on the weekends um because they know that most communities do not permit them. Um, and if they're left there on Monday and they're in the rightway, you know, we can we can take them. And we have um usually Saturday, Sunday morning is probably 884 is loaded with them.

Yeah. Sometimes they forget to come pick them up. Yeah. So, but those are in the rightway and we already prohibit like signs like that in the rightway and off premises signs. Um, so those are problems that we already deal with as best we can. Yeah. This is more of um, hey, we're like the outside design center up here. They're building a brand new building. They want to have a a project sign out there. So, here's some criteria. You know, here's the size your sign can be.

Or maybe the trades want to have, I don't know, the signage for their the trades that are coming on the site to do something. Maybe they have additional signage. Oh, wait. All right. Signs on vacant parcels. Okay. Signs during construction. Oh, here's the last one. This one um signs during elections. So, this is um something different. that we're proposing here. I saw um actually the city of Willoughby, this kind of came from what the city of Willoughby was doing, but signs during elections. So, from up to 30 days prior to the day absentee ballots are available or the day that early voting is permitted um for a general primary or special election and up to 3 days following, the number of signs on a residential lot is not restricted provided that no such sign shall be larger than eight square feet and a height of 4 feet. and and that essentially would allow for someone to promote to have more signage for whatever they want during that that time frame, it would still be subject to like you know the then so I guess Rich from like an enforcement standpoint after the three days if they kept it all up then the zoning inspector would have to probably look at the signs and go Okay, they have say they have four signs up and they're each three square feet. That's 12 square ft. So if they didn't have any other temporary signs, they could probably leave them up. I'd have to figure out the 45 days if we got a complaint, you know,

take photo or something and kind of make see if they took any down, replace them, you know, I mean, it would be, you know, a little challenging. Um, but at least we would have some parameters and then again it could roll into then it could be considered their permanent signage if they didn't have any other signs and if it exceeded the 45 days as long as it still met that that maximum square footage allowance. So I know that's a those are a lot of changes with the temporary signs. I don't know if you guys want to pause there and talk about any of that more or if you want me to just keep going.

Um, it's in 300 309. So 3 days 4 days after after an election all those signs should be taken down. Not necessarily. The the temper the um the the lift on not enforcing the the maximum square footage would then come off and now then they would be subject to the temporary sign regulations that are applicable all year round.

Oh, okay. Yeah. if they decide not to take them down, right? So, if they don't take them down, then I would have to look at is, okay, these are their temporary signs. And then, okay, how much square footage, but they don't take them down, so then they'll fall into another category here. Yeah, I've seen political signs that are out there that have been there for four years, big ones, right? And I think with some of those like you could easily prove that they've been longer than the 45 days. And if they are obnox and if they are over

the size for allowance for the signage then at least then we could have some kind of possible enforcement maybe. But right now we have no signs restrictions on any of that. Uh would this does it need it would say signs during elections. So do we need to define that it includes levies or or issues on the ballot or it's just simply elections? That is it broad enough that covers any election of for any any anything other than anything any anything all-incclusive meaning political candidates issues levies boton etc support of issue one whatever

yeah I mean I think it does I mean we talk about for any general primary or special election I don't know Bry if you have anything to add to that no I mean I agree when I read that I wonder should have some sort of definition but then I think definition well and then is it we say general primary or special I mean local state federal I mean right that's how I why I think of it but we say general primary or special right it could be a local thing right school

I don't know just wondering just saying elections covers That that was really my only question on that one. Well, would that would special elections kind of cover some of those or like so if a like a that would be a stretch? I think special elections would be a stretch. Yeah. I don't know. for a levy, you'd have to have like presidential and then like you say a school levy. So we had I think maybe we have to line up some categories that would make sense to them.

I guess I'll defer to Bri that that Yeah, I'm not sure what where we got this. We kind of took this from Willoughby. Yeah. Do you do you know do they define election? I don't I don't not in the um we can look into I think the more categories we start defining I think that's where I think we get in that area. Yeah, you're probably right. Right. Possibly content based. Yeah. Um,

we'll try to use one word that compasses everything. Special. What's special? What's special to you or special to me is, you know. Yeah. But it's out there, though. You know, it's something that everyone knows they have to go and put their check mark on a on a ballot. I I think I generated that question because the proposed uh changes eliminate the definition of a political sign, right? So, if we eliminate the definition, then what is it? What is what is an election?

And keep in mind, I mean, just because someone is saying vote for X or vote for this levy, there there's other political signs that could be out there, right? Um I'm sure you've seen some um sure you know um you know second amendment right or something like that. Those are political signs, right? They're not necessarily election signs. Um yeah, we'll have to maybe consider that. Um but a special election is usually I mean that is one that usually is paid for separately. It's not you know the primary is not the general. It's definitely an election can't be levy issues, bond issues, that sort of thing. So, oh, I'm sorry.

Could you define them from the election board with the the general election or what special elections are? I mean, I I would not want to define it so much, but if you're looking for a definition with the the the election board, wouldn't they have the definition what a general election is or what's special? Sure, I would think so. Yeah, probably have a list of all the uh let's the what categories, you know, cuz we have to know where to put Mhm. right

what we want voted on. So why why did we eliminate the definition of political science? We were trying to I think eliminate any additional category because we actually did regulate political science not just define them. Aren't we still regulating them? I don't I don't know. Um that's a good question. I'm not sure if this includes polit all political signs.

To me, this might include signs regarding an upcoming election. Different than a political sign. So, in other words, let's say someone has a sign that just says Trump. Is that an election sign or is it just a political sign? I get it. I don't know. Yeah. Yeah. Um I would probably argue it's political political sign. I think the the main point what I was looking at when I when I read this is that the main takeaway of this is during this cycle whatever this 30 days prior to the number of signs permitted on a residential lot is not restricted. Doesn't matter what the signs

are. Mhm. It's basically so it it could be completely unrelated to an election. Right. Right. It could. It's It's I guess it's just an effort to try to not restrict freedom of speech, giving residential lot owners additional square footage to to get their message out, to speak freely about what their issues are. And around these times of the years, people tend to need to be able to do that.

Right. Right. Right. So, without saying what the sign is going to say or anything, we need to somehow be more flexible maybe during certain times of the year and maybe not all throughout the year. Does that make sense? Sure. Sure. Well, when does the freedom of speech go to be offensive? How how do we do we Great question. I mean there I don't know if you've seen some um Portage County they have expletives and then something I mean and they're up been up for a while. Yes.

Um so I mean I can't believe they don't regulate that and somehow say listen that's offensive but I mean maybe it's complaint driven right maybe someone has a complaint. I don't know. So we're not going to address that. May maybe it's a it's a matter of opinion or a matter of I don't know when when did something offensive when isn't anything I think has to do with hate. I mean we know what hate speech is hate. Yeah that would be offensive that would definitely be offensive when you're going to project harm to somebody for example racism that sort of I mean we had a candy we had a candidate running on that.

Can we It's tough though. It's tough. I No, what I'm saying is it's um it's hard for an example. I feel like I mean um you know depending on which side I guess I don't know like is it an insight to violence kind of thing? Is it a threat? Is it um you know I would think yes be able to maybe you know you have to really look at the case on that but

I think it would not be I think the justice would run say or whatever I know it when I see it right it's offensive but I don't know if that actually apply I mean it's hard to really apply that right I mean some people are saying that you know certain political signs are offensive others saying they are not some say that certain flags that you fly are offensive others are saying It gets gets down to that, right? So, I know that the Ohio Supreme Court, you know, and US Supreme Court, they've had issues really dealing with that stuff. Um, well, I think anytime you have to bring some harm to an individual, a human being. I mean, you can that's obvious that it's hate. I know this goes beyond the temporary sign that we're talking about, but

no, but these are these are exactly the questions and that's why it's like how are some of these would again the complaint driven part of it makes it feel like okay that's a little bit louder because it's not just someone's opinion or or someone we have to actually investigate it and we have to go through this this process but I mean to your point um you know to a human being I mean isn't that also a question right what is a human being right so you might have someone pro-choice versus pro-life. And I'm just saying, you know, I don't know that it's necessarily a I don't think it's black and white. I think it's definitely

Brighty. I' I've saw some communities that were regulating just basically like adult content like on the signs that they were not permitting like ex like sexually explicit content on signage. Possibly. I I don't know. I mean, that's not So, I don't know. That's something else that I don't think we have issues with that here necessarily, but we have another I wasn't proposing anything to address that, but I did

I wasn't suggesting we have any issues. is suggesting that as a board, as a body, as a governmental body, director of the trustees that we take a stance on that, that we put something in here to say, you know what, these types of things are considered offensive in our community. And it would apply to any signing any exactly right. I can support that. I won't I'm not volunteering to write it. H no I don't want to say it the right way without

Okay. Do we want to continue? Yes. So another question proposed changes you know just the temporary sign question again. Um, is there a reason we would exclude a temporary sign on a building? Why is a temporary sign okay on a building? A built on a on a home on a house in a window. It's just I'm just asking. You're asking why is it why is that okay? Well, we have people for our for Conquer Township. Here's a perfect example. You order the dog. Yeah.

And that's that's there 24 hours a day, seven days a week, all the time. Yeah. Or no solicitors. Or no solicitors. Or there's a sign I seen on my pass in Painsville. It's got a gun. Shows the barrel of a gun at the front door of the house. Yeah. Pointing at you. Don't be afraid of the dog. Okay. Be afraid of my word. Be afraid of my smith. And it says, "Don't be afraid at the door." You know, that that's been this house I passed. That's for years. That's a sign, right? Yeah, that's a sign. That's a sign.

And it's not greater than 10% of the window or what? No, I get it's a small one. Yeah, I get your question though because there's there there's a there's a house right now that has a temporary sign on it and it's on the side of their house. It's on Johnny Cake and I thought it was going to come down like and I haven't looked, you know, I noticed it one day and I'm like, "Wow, that's an odd place for a sign was promoting an event. The event has already come and gone. The sign is still there." Um, but I get your question, why are we having them walls? Like, yeah, most people put them in the yard. Yeah,

a lot of people put them in the there are some that have to put them in the window because again in the hunt like over in Quill Hollow Hunt Club they were not allowed to do any yard signs. They had to even put their real estate signs in the window. Their HOA was making them put them in the window. So, um, yeah,

just giving people options. I think most folks won't put a temporary sign on their wall, but maybe they will. I I don't Maybe they want to put something on the garage for whatever. I don't really know. Yeah, I guess it might apply more to commercial or non-residential where the a sign on I don't know. Walk this way, front door this way. Maybe those are signs, too. I I guess I guess I'm asking a question but answering that. Yeah. Okay. Signs on buildings. Scratch that. Cuz maybe it was the window thing I was kind of like bothered by cuz I've seen it.

Judge's court. The new street. Oh, yeah. Be in the window for a long time. Oh, the street. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Sorry. That's okay. Anybody else right now or you're thinking Hyram, what's going on? Well, I'm just thinking about a a temper, not not even a permanent sign in a window cuz uh I'm advertising my kids in the band and there's a big band note with the name underneath it and you stick that in the window. Yeah.

That stays for months at a time. Yeah. Yeah. Or the ones that say, "My daughter, my son's an honor student at Riverside High School." I've seen a whole bunch of those. Yeah. Yeah. I see it all the time. Yeah. So, out of curiosity, if someone you were to complain about that, how would you enforce that? Complain specifically, I'm sorry, about a window. Signs in the window. Yeah. How would you How would you handle that? about the number of them or sure any or the length of time length of time. How how would you address how would you Yeah. Knock the door.

No. Okay. Well, as what I do with any zoning violation as I go to the property to see what what I actually see, right? Do they have signs up in the window? Okay. Take a photo of it. Come, you know, look at the resolution. What are the requirements for these signs or whatever it is? And I can't just take a word that from the complaintant that it's been here for 6 months, right? Like I have to because I don't if something unless they supply you with a picture with a date. I'm sorry. What? Unless they supply you with a dated picture.

Well, and even with that, that's taking somebody else's words. So like if something were to ever escalate where we had to go to court or something like that, you would have to bring that person in to testify and it's easier just to try to collect your own information. So I would take a photograph if it exceeded, you know, and then I would have to come back and if it was a time issue, you know, if it could be no more than 30 days, I would just have to come back in 30 days, photograph it and make a determination. Is this still the same sign? Is it still in the same location? Is there now a zoning violation? Um, and if there is a zoning violation, you know, then and then I should I typically start off with like a warning letter like, "Hey, did you know we have this rule? You're you're not in compliance with it because of this, and this is how you can get into compliance. If you think I'm incorrect, you can appeal my decision to the BCA." or if you you agree but you you have uh some kind of practical difficulty and you want to keep it here for a certain you know you can ask for you can go to the BCA and ask for a variance. I have a neighbor down at the end of my street that has his son's school logo painted in the driveway.

Oh, interesting. Yeah, it's painted in a driveway just really as you pull into the driveway. Well, that's non-conforming. So we won't have to deal with that. Just painted on his concrete. Yeah. I mean, I don't find an objection, but I just say there it is. That's interesting. Yeah. Promoting his son's football. Yeah. That's cool. You can't come up with everything. Oh, yeah. There's just something

like But like the music note, I have two in my windows right now at home, so I didn't know exactly what you're talking about. Um, but if they stayed up all year long, maybe those are my two permanent signs because I don't have any other signs. Those are my only signs, my two window signs from each kid. And you know, so they they technically could fall under my permanent sign allowance and be allowed to be there all year long. I think the biggest thing I don't worry about is a safety issue. If I see the right away, for example, obstructing obstruction that that's pretty a critical consideration. Yeah.

In itself, you know, other than that, science what might be objectionable for me is not objectionable for you. You know, if it stays out there, it's hard to try to come up with something. It's Does the township ever take political signs that are in the road right away? No, we don't ever. Never. Never. Okay. The only thing I've ever done um is if it was a sight obstruction is try to get the property owner to like move it back. Okay. But never have taken them. I've never taken them out of the rightway though. I've taken other signs out of the rightway. But not Yeah.

I think the township is well within its rights to take them out of the right of way. But um I get it because there's even a comment in the Reed case where Thomas says something to the extent of the municipality even took it was defin talking about another case but where the municipality took the political sign out of the road right of way and kept it or something like that made like almost suggested that was you know prohibited. Um I disagree I've seen municipalities take political signs out of the road right away all the time. Yeah. Especially when you know it's like a a primary that's in March where we have you know not such great weather and they're still snowplowing and I mean they take them out anyway quite frankly with their snow plow right

so but I get it just curious all right let's continue on page nine other proposed changes

oh okay chair goes back to heaven So other other changes, you'll notice if you've reviewed the packet in advance that we are updating uh 302 30.02 definitions, trying to one get rid of some of these categories, right? Um but then also updating some of the definitions. one one to point out would be a revised definition for a flag and a new definition for flag sign. And then also making a distinction under our freestanding signs. Um the a difference between a ground sign and a pole sign which under our current regulations under the permanent signs in in non-resident res residential districts. We essentially only really permit ground signs which is something I want to talk to you guys about a little bit in the next couple slides here to get your feedback on. But then um some other general computations, some updates to that 30.03, some minor um changes there. [Applause] Some of that was rearranging some of the existing um regulations as well. But under 3004, these are the residential signs and signs in residential districts. These are the permanent signs that you'll see. Um, this looks like a lot of red changes cuz it it is, but essentially I've kind of taken the gotten rid of the table and broke it down by these are the rules for parcels with one family and two family residential properties. These are the rules for the multif family residential

properties. And then these are the rules for um residential subdivisions. development signs as you come in and then for non-residential uses and the residential districts just somewhat reorganizing that allowing for this essentially the exact same um square footages and number um and setbacks. Um so if there's any questions on that I can yeah on uh gee where am I 30.04 Uh D, non-residential uses in residential district.

Mhm. Uh signed not to exceed 50 square ft. I thought that was kind of large. That's what we currently have. So I just kept what we had. I mean that's definitely up for discussion. Yeah. So that would be, you know, maybe like a group home or a church or um community center or something. Those would be like the non-residential uses. Six by eight. What's that? 6 by8 is 48. So that would be a That's a That's a large size. It's big.

It is. Yeah. [Applause] Wow. Okay. Okay. Other proposed changes.

Yep. Um and then section 30.05. These are the signs in non-residential districts. Here again, I'm somewhat reorganizing some of the existing regulations, breaking it down. um building signs, projecting signs, and then keeping the same, you know, additional areas for corner lots and large setbacks, giving them increased signage based on that. Um, but one aspect, um, and I, as I just mentioned, we're kind of making a distinction between ground signs and pole signs, both of them being freestanding signs. When this resolution was initially adopted in 14, it did allow for um like the pole signs and it gave additional allowances for sites that were adjacent to I90 and sites that had frontage on State Route 44 and Cryle Road. Uh, I kept it in the the text right now because I wasn't sure how to address this, but because a couple years ago after the Verizon sign went in, which I have a couple pictures here. I'm kind of going out of order. If you remember, the Verizon sign was installed and that is 120 square foot pole sign 30t off the ground. And after that was approved because it met the sign resolution, we heard a lot of negative feedback from trustees, lots of people, right? And so we changed the sign height that we reduced it severely down to 12 feet. So now any sign can be no taller than 12 feet. We make it have to be on like basically a monument sign, like a a groundbased sign, which you would not be allowed to have that pole sign anymore.

So with lots that with lots that face State Route 44 and Cryle Road, instead of the the the 60 square foot allowance that every commercial lot is allowed, they're allowed to go up to 80 square ft. Um but then the sites that are adjacent to I90 can go up to 120 square ft. Um, so I'm questioning whether or not it makes sense to have the sites next to I90 allowed to go 120 square ft. um because we're essentially not allowing these poll signs anymore. Or do we want to make a change and allow those sites that back up that have visibility on I90 to have the pole signs? Um and therefore maybe they want the larger square footage as well. I put like a zoning map in here, too. And this is going to take obviously more time than tonight to kind of go through. Um, but the commercial districts like the the light purple, that's that RD2 district, there's a handful of lots there that have frontage or visibility potentially on I90. I know that uh,

um, which is the Gateway business. They they bought a parcel of land so they could carve it out and they put their sign real close to 90. So when you drive down when you're headed east on 90 P there coming up to the interchange you can see uh's sign kind of in the woods. Um so they have one and then as you keep going down or across I90, you know the old Quail Hollow Hotel, they had a pole sign there which at this point it's non-conforming. So if they ever want to reuse that, they're going to have to get a variance to reuse that. So the maximum height even along 90 is 12 feet.

Yes. Yeah. So that that might not be what we want. We might need to look at that again. Um is and then there's only but there's only a couple really a couple parcels that really above this, right? So, the ones in the RD2 that the hospital um right across from the Quail Hollow Hotel, Old former Hotel where the parking lot is and then then you get into residential. They're not going to do that. Um then you get into some M that the the the blue uh the manufacturing district, that's where we have the Arbania um AC companies, the insurance company has a building there. They have a lot behind them that could be developed.

Hannah and Electric, there's signs on their building, right? Oh, yes. Yes. I'm sorry. Hannah and Electric, they did a wall sign on the back side. Yeah, that's right. Cuz when you're driving down 90, they did a wall sign. They didn't do a pull sign. And then right after you get past Revena Road on the right, there's that um Landmark, the landscape contractor. And then other than that, everything else is like residential. Well, when University Hospital put their uh building up, didn't they have five or six uh variances to the sign? They had many, many variances as far as I understand. Many more.

Lots of variances because they think they were constructed under the old sign regulations, not even the one that we're looking at now. So, all of those have variances. Oh, yeah. And so so why don't we keep that? I mean, keep what we're proposing and if they want to put up a pole sign that goes 20 ft in the air, they got to go to BCA. As much as I don't like to do that, unless you want to put a a 20ft pole sign down, but but we're talking about I90, right? Mhm. Right now we're talking about 90,

but ODOT governs those signs. Go ODOT governs the sign, the placement, and the height. Well, they're not in the I90 right away. They're on private property that abuts I90. Has what? But evening, I think they have their visual. You sure they don't have I don't know. Cuz I thought that was what uh faced even though they bought property. They weren't on I90. They weren't on They were on their own property. Okay. They were governed by ODOT on this on the high. I think back in time, Mercura had their sign there also, but not for circa advertise. I can try to look into that. I think so.

They were pretty strict about height, visual. Yeah, that was a law passed sight distance number ago, the federal law for how close it could be to the freeway. every way. But they get around it down south. You go down Interstate 75 through Georgia, they got giant signs way back. They make their own rules down there. They do. They do. But my concern would be is 12 ft visually high enough. It's not along route 9. It's not. Yeah, it's not. Put a hollow sign because the trees would block it. Yeah, the trees are going to block it. So, you got to trim a lot. All right.

Yeah. So, what is the right height? I don't know. But well, I I don't even 12 feet would be permitted by ODOT. It's in it's in the sight line. I I don't I don't know. I don't know the rules. I remember they had very strict about the height and distance from the freeway to each at interchanges or just at any location. Yeah. They passed a law back years ago. Yeah. Because it was getting really cluttered, you know, and uh I'm going to look into that. Yeah. Maybe I can look into that. That's why certain signs are green, certain signs are brown. Mhm. Brown to identify like a a landmark or historic place. And they put those restaurant signs where the each restaurant gets a little Yeah. as you approach an inter intersection. Yeah.

The restaurant gets so much space. Mhm. Now those are in the rightway though. They put up controlled by those are controlled by Oh, yeah. Or federal federal actually. Yeah. Anyway, you might might be wrong, but I guess yeah, after starting to look at this more closely, 12 foot tall sign is not going to be lucrative to do a pole sign. So, we're essentially saying you can't do pole signs. Yeah.

And I just want to make sure is everyone okay with that? Do we understand that? Is that still okay? I mean, that's what we have in here now essentially. The only thing is I didn't, you know, I wasn't sure if it made sense to then give sites adjacent to I90 more square footage just to do a bigger sign if they can't really make it something tall that you would even see from I90. So, what's the point? Yeah. What's the point of making it bigger if you can't see it anyway? Well, you could if it was big enough if it was high enough. Yeah. Yeah. Well, no, that's not what we're talking square footage wise. Yeah. Even that Even that you you could

big enough and bright enough. Yeah. I mean, supports our businesses. So, we're talking about just Concord, right? Yeah. Right. Don't forget we have helicopters that land by the hospital, for example, that need a lot of lot of clearance. Hey, we got a Taco Bell now. They all come off land. You remember all their traffic they said, bringing up an old issue. right there. They they they're so that twothirds of the traffic was coming from I90. Even Even Taco Bell was trying to do a poll sign. They were they they they first submitted to me a pole sign. Yes, they did. Really? They did. Um and I was just kind of like,

"Your wall signs are taller than your pole sign." Like, and we don't allow it based on the design criteria for the base of the sign. But I think with this we're we're clearly stating potentially that we do not want poll signs. Yeah. Um where under the current one it's a little maybe unclear. Not as clear. And I sure hope somebody crashes into the Verizon one. Oh my gosh.

Yeah. Yeah. I mean, if you're proposing something along I90, sorry, but you're not suggesting it also along State Route 44, right? I'm sorry, what? State Route 44 in terms of poll signs. Well, that that's an that's another one where initially they were potentially allowing that, but under the height restrictions now, I don't think we're permitting that at all. And would you guys agree that it would not be appropriate to have full signs on Crow Road? I mean, or no. Auburn, I mean, 44. 44. No. Or 44. No. Yeah.

Okay. Cuz I have some other examples of some signs that like for context, you know, purposes just to show you. Um I don't know if Brian, maybe we should put the slides up again real quick. Um sorry, trying to Okay. So, as we talked about, the Verizon one is like 30 feet tall. The one um to the right of that is just the rendering of one of the crowd crossing signs. I know there's like three of them over there, but for size purposes, this is just under 11 ft tall and it's just over 60 square ft.

And um they were allowed to do more than one because they have a lot of frontage and it met the criteria um where you could put the distance between them and do more than one. Um then even the sheets which is right at Capitol Parkway and State Route 44. Um they put this the sign on the top left here. This is the one that's at the corner there. Yep. Um they are just at 12 feet

and it's just over 65 square ft like 65 and a half square feet. So even under that they could have potentially gone up to 80 ft. Um but they kept it around 65. And then the um crearyy, those are two other examples that came in. Um the one on the top right corner that's about 45 ft. They've got the monument base and then the other one um is about 24 ft. Mhm.

Okay. Oops. Okay. And continuing um some other changes that I wanted to point out in section 30.07. This was the is the electronic message center um section of the resolution. Um I'm proposing to kind of reword this, give it a new term and a new definition. Um because some of these there really are like changeable copy change the message sign. You could do it manually or you can do it by electronic means. So, there still are some places um that do the manual change. Like here at Town Hall, we have a sign out front that you can change the lettering, right? Um or there's a couple or the church at the corner.

Red Hawk. Yep. What's that? Some Red Hawk does. Oh, Red Hawk. Yeah. The changeable copy. So, this funny signs.

Yeah. Yeah. I forgot Red Hawk. They always change the words on there. Yeah. And this just allows this kind of reflects that. So, you can do the changeable copy whether it be manual or you can do the change changeable copy by electronic means. and these are the rules for them. Um, one new thing that I was proposing to add was if you're going to do an electronic message center um in a residential district for a non-residential use that um I included in some new setback requirements um 100 ft away from a residential parcel and a minimum 120 ft away from a residential structure. just to try to cut cut down potentially on any um nuisance from any light dissipation or anything like that.

3007 and I don't know ABC whatever it is top of page 27. Mhm. Number four. Transition time between messages andor message frame shall be instantaneous. Does that mean it doesn't go in line by line by line by line? It's got to be B. Here's the message. That's what it said. Here's the message. Here it is. It can't be a a PowerPoint thing where you throw one line in and then another line. The whole message. St. Gabes has one of those and the message. Oh, yeah. It does.

Is that what you mean by that one? It's got to be. It just whatever the message is, if it changed, it has to be like immediate. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Okay. No scrolling, no flashing. Yeah. No distraction. Yeah. No fancy powerpoints. Who Who has one? St. Gabes. No animated. You know, St. Gab St. Gabes does. That's the only one I know of. Oh, I I Auburn Career Center has one. That's Yeah, they're Yeah. Yeah, they have issu Yeah, they're not using it correctly sometimes. Auburn has one. where it comes in line. Yes. Yeah. We approved it. I remember we approved it.

Yeah, I know. We did. Oh, we didn't have this going in. Yeah. Okay. We still don't. Okay.

Oh, and then also adding into that um just making um it clear that you can't do off-site advertising on those changeable copy signs as well. And then um section 30.08. These are the commercial banners. I'm kind of renaming this to light pole banners cuz that's essentially what it is. It's like those small little flag banner signs that you might see like at I think Robert Career Center actually had them or like Lakeland College when you drive around and throughout the campuses they might be promoting something like uniformally throughout the campus.

Yeah. These are like those small signs that we already have in here that we're essentially potentially allowing um businesses to use in non-residential uses. Just renaming that to a light pole banner. And then also making it um clear that you can't do electronic message center or changeable copy on these light pole banners and um that you could you could leave them up year round. come. So, it wouldn't be subject to the 45 days like the temporary banner and that you're not permitted to put any other signs on those polls that you've been approved.

So, would that be like the better signs that you see? Right. Oh, right. Yeah. I mean, some communities do them that way, but are those are those on the rightway usually? Yeah, they were on the polls. So, those Yeah, those would maybe fall under a different kind of category because we don't allow signs in the rightway, but I the governmental entity puts them up in the rightway, then Yeah. then it's probably okay. Those signs are put up by the by the city, I think.

Yeah. Yeah. Usually it's the city or the township that puts those out. Curtain put those puts those up. And then 30 3010. This is our signs exempt from regulations. Just a little bit of cleanup there. Um uh one one potential change would be to exempt flags of the um US, the state or the township um foreign nations um that have now this is diplomatic relations with the US.

Um that the the basically these flags um they must be flown in accordance with established protocols. Um, but they're also exempt from regulations. But a flag that doesn't meet these conditions would be considered a sign and would be subject to the sign regulations. So, do you happen to know what the protocols are? Good question. Yeah, Brady Brady and I kind of talked about this a little bit. Right. Doesn't the US flag have to be lit? Lit. Yeah. I don't know. There are circles. I mean, I I have it in my mailbox post. Is it lit? No. Yeah, supposed to be. Oh,

mine's not either, but I do have a light there. Or it can be taken down. Yeah, take it down at night. Oh. Oh. Oh, right. I get a little LED light. You just get a a solar thing projector. Solar needs to be lit. That's part of respect for the for this bike. Yeah. So, uh that's it. I mean you can it can be displayed vertically or any yeah any angle either way as long as in the evening it's lit for for the evening. Okay. Thank you. If it's displayed vertically the stars have to be in a certain orientation but I don't know what it is.

I don't know if it's stars in upper right or upper left. One of them. One of them. One of those tooth. Yeah. Okay. Cool. Okay. Okay. And then um just a couple small changes to section 311, the prohibited signs. Um one of the additions would be to prohibit flag signs.

So that brings up the next question. I I I went to the definition of flag and flag sign trying to draw the distinction. So if I have a a post freestanding temporary portable portable freestanding sign that is mounted in a manner allows the sign to flutter. That's prohibited. So, why is that here? If a flag is I don't I don't I'm sorry. I don't understand the difference here. Oh, flag sign. Flag

flag sign would essentially prohibit like those blade or feather like signs that a lot some businesses use for temporary signage. I have a photo of one. Um it's out of the United States. No. Oh, no. It would not be it. The flags of the Yeah, those flags are exempt from regulations. I'm I thought it was referencing United the US flag sign. So, it's a flag flag, right? Or a banner or a banner.

Well, we have the new proposed definition of flag sign. Yes, I I was reading that because now go back to see the definition of banner sign. So a banner is cloth or canvas too. Um I guess I don't see a lot of difference between a banner and a flag. I think the flag the flag sign is more like waves and like draws attention to it. can be maybe potentially more distracting where the banner sign is more like sturdy and like erected if it's on the ground more it's not going to be moving when it's installed. Okay. But it could be cloth canvas. Mhm. Okay.

Well, a lot of time you see the flags now on matter of fact people's porches that are strung this way. It's a form of a flag that is stressing. Okay. So that's what they think about. Now, is that Yeah. Like is that a sign when they when the the orientation of I I'm not even sure if it's a complete flag, but it's got the red, white, and blue. Sure. And that semiircle. I wouldn't call that a holiday decoration probably. That That's what I call and that would be exempt. Yeah. Okay. Okay. What kind of word is

I mean Okay. would is that the most common? Yeah, we do have the exemptions for holiday lights and decorations, right? When they're displayed during, you know. Yeah. Yeah. So, I think some of that would fall into that. There's a military post that's in Painsville. If you went there, they give you how to display the flag. Ah, they give you all the ways of doing the flags whether on post or you know hanging vertically. They have signs and they have a regulations for how you're supposed to display any of the United States.

Okay. Oh, one more question then on page 30.6. You're going way back. Yeah. Yeah. a second. I waited till last to pop this one. Okay. But I already brought the political sign that was eliminated. But above it, I'm a little just concerned how a permanent sign is defined. It's like a negative of the other. Doesn't We're not defining we're just saying it doesn't satisfy the definition of a temporary. So all the rest are permanent. It's the opposite.

It's the opposite. I I don't know. The lawyer in me says that's not really a good a good way to define a permanent sign. Fixed technically nothing once it's figured we could once it's installed it's fixed. I think there would be taken down. Yeah. It's permanent till somebody takes till somebody takes it down. Yeah. I'm sorry. What? I missed what? I I stumped the attorneys. We should look at it. Yeah,

I know. And I think part of that is like we we have a pretty good definition of what a temporary sign is, right? Yeah. And then if it doesn't meet that criteria of a temporary sign, then we then we're kind of like, well, then it's a permanent sign and we'll regulate it as a permanent sign. So, what is the permanent sign? It's not a temporary sign, but is there a better way to define it? Probably. Yeah. Okay. I just found it odd to define it.

Thank you. I mean, we could potentially just leave what we have now. Any sign designed or designated for use for an indefinite period of time. I don't see why we would have to say it could be permanent or you know what I mean?

I'm not sure. [Applause] [Applause] I'll just keep going if you guys Well, that's basically the end of it. Nothing about break point, right? Yep. Yeah. Just some small other updates to

the design and illumination criteria. I was just kind of moving um from in 312. Those items A1 and two, those were carry over from another section. Just just brought those back over here. um kind of updating the illumination criteria. And then one one thing I was proposing under the administrative procedures as far as how we handle temp uh sign permits. Um right now for temporary sign permits for non-residential uses, we require them to submit an application. They submit a $25 deposit and if they remove the sign as they were as per the zoning resolution, we will rebate back them. We'll give them that deposit back the $25. Okay. I was suggesting um that we don't make it a deposit anymore that we just charge them a $25 permit to help cover the administrative expenses of of doing all of that.

Um because in order to pretty minor Yeah. So you'll see that proposed change on the yeah appendix one the zoning fee schedule as well and some other small updates to reflect the solar energy system stuff and the EV charging that we just adopted as well. Okay. [Applause] Heather, the one suggestion I have Mhm. Um, wherever we have picture, are we going to put these pictures in the regulation? Which ones? Oh, any picture that we have? Some of the ones that are in there. I mean, you have specific ones that you want. Well, no, in general. Okay. In total. Yeah.

I I'd like to see the the reference. I I'm looking at page 30- or 30.12 and the red there. In case of an irregular wall surface, a straight line extended along the wall surface shall be used to measure the length. And that's for primary building frontage. Mhm. And I'd like to see in there see figure 30.03F.1 03 point F.1 and then put that figure underneath the picture. Oh, okay. Yeah. Identify the figures. Yeah. Yeah. And that goes throughout the whole for any of them that we're going to have in there.

We got We've got a lot of pictures. Yeah. And some of them I was proposing and I don't to maybe eliminate. I didn't think they were all that helpful, but we can I thought they were some Oh, all of them. Even even the ones even these these were very helpful. Oh. Oh, okay. The ones you had in your PowerPoint. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Well, they always say a picture is worth a thousand words. Yeah. Okay. Okay. All right. Yeah, I can I can if you guys all want that, we can make sure that there's very specific references to the to the figures. I think it's a good idea

cuz a lot of times when you're reading a regulation especially, there could be some confusion, you know. Yeah. But when you look through a picture right away, just make a drawing. Oh, it's obvious. Okay. No further, right? Answers all my questions, you know, but then scratch your head. Did they mean this? then you might start confusing things with the other verbiage that's in there. So, it helps.

This might be nitpicking sometimes. It's okay, but it might not. I put it I circled it yesterday. Uh page 30.14. Uh 30 uh so it starts that's where 30.04 start starts. Mhm.

Couple pages later 30.05 starts. So the title of this section is residential signs. Uh I'm having there there's no such thing as a residential sign. Signs right that are in a residential district. Oh, it says signs in residential districts, but this says residential signs and then uh 305 is signs in residential districts. I that was a little well the description is much more understandable than the and the one you're mentioning.

304s are permanent signs for all residential and non-residential in residential districts. 305 I knew permit signs and non-residential. So yeah, that's not right. It's not right. Right. What the distinction is changed that the titles on 04 and 05. That's what I'm thinking.

Yeah. I didn't know that. This is where like I think which all the red kind of like wait I went looked at it then I went to 3005 then I said oh okay and then I went wait a minute 34 305 non-residential non duplicative or the on the non residential section oh I was just looking at no I agree maybe it should I'm not sure why we took out permanent should it say permanent signs in residential districts and then permanent signs or in non-residential districts

but at 304 but then the next sentence says and for non-residential the sentence I don't and then it went multif family and then D 304D is non-residential uses in residential districts. Mhm. Yeah. But 305 is non-residential. You have to come up with verbiage that pertains the same for all of them. You're not confused, but I not Well, I mean, so for in 304D, these are the non-residential uses in residential districts.

So, how can you have a non-residential use of a sign in a residential? I'm confused by that. What does that mean? No, the sign is not residential or so you like the use of the lot is being for a non-residential purpose. Non-residential uses. So a church located in an R1 would be considered a non-residential use. What kind of signage are they allowed to have? Oh. Okay.

But I agree that that we do need to fix that.

They're non-resident. Got it. Yeah. I didn't I didn't think of it church. Yeah. And once you deep dig into it deeper, now you realize why it's worded that way because we have like you mentioned the church is in a residential district. Yeah. Or you'll be building your Yeah. Okay. Remember all this stuff from 2014. Yeah. That's right. Yeah. Maybe maybe we didn't need to change the heading of it at all. Maybe I should have just said Yeah,

cuz it initially originally said permanent signs in residential districts. We could have just probably left it that way. Yeah, I think so. Because then Yeah. And then it could have said permanent signs and nonres non-residential distance. Yeah. Yeah. But you answered you cleared cleared that up for me. Thank you. Okay. We But good point though. I think we should fix that.

Okay. Thank you. And Bry, I was going to ask you like because there's so many red changes on here, is there a way that we could um almost do like this as a we're just replacing this entire section and then somehow present it to the commission and this is the new text instead of going through this. Okay, what are we taking out? What are we putting in? Yeah. Yes, we could do kind of like a a restated I guess section 30, but we would still need to show the changes. You know what I mean? Like by underline or something like that. So in other words, even though we're taking this section and even doing, you know, let's say that one of these sections is not being at all changed, which I don't know if that's even possible, but in any event, we would definitely have to show the underline still.

So even though you're going to do the whole third, like let's say you're going to do all section 30 and replace it with a new section 30, we should show exactly what's being changed. It doesn't have to be red, but underlined somehow. So it still have to look like this. It doesn't have to look like that, but I think we have to do something to show might as well keep it that way. Yeah, I'm not going to make another document to do that then. Yeah, that sounds although could it would it be well maybe we could talk after the meeting, but would it be acceptable to like give the board a clean copy with the changes accepted as a side to it? Yeah, absolutely. So they can at least see Okay. All right.

Yeah. If this section didn't exist, then I would say Yeah. Okay. [Applause] Okay. So, what what was that conversation? How are we going to go forward with this? Make a complete

copy of what the all the changes are going to be and put it in one document. So for the for the next work session that we have, we can still have like the red changes like this and then I can do a save as and accept all the changes and so that way you could read. Okay, so assuming that we accepted all these changes, how would I actually be reading this document? Like what would it but for the text amendment itself, this would still be what we would be showing the public. Well, what the changes are. Change from change to Yeah,

something like that. Yeah. Well, if you have any specific changes or comments you'd like to have, if anybody has any specific comments you'd like Heather to comment on or consider, I suggest you give them to her directly. I mention everything tonight, but for me, thank you. Well, I've got a bunch of Oh, you do? Chicken. Why am I not surprised? Yeah. Oh, he likes changing all the grammar. Yeah. Well, punctuation punctuation grammar. No, there's a few of them.

That's fine. There there's a few of those, but that's all right. Uh my my wife was very ticklish on that, but she sees things going on the screens or whatever on TV and the that's incorrect. The verbiage is gone. the punctuation she don't these radio TV stations have people like check that out that's terrible show not she gets all right there is a whole bunch are terrible okay all right whole bunch of terrible any other discussion on the sign regulation tonight anybody up here

okay for Okay, we're done with the first of a few. So, if you have any specific comments or or concerns about assign regulation, thank you, Heather. This is a lot of work. A lot of work. An awesome amount of work. It is both the PowerPoint and what what we haven't read. So, thank you very much for doing that. Thank you. You're welcome. Both of you put it together. Thank you.

So, old business, we have the item tabled on the Concord Township Zoning Commission 1 and nine group that goes until well less than a year. July 2026. Let's just change the zoning. So, next meeting October 7th. the 10th month of the year already. Mhm. Where does time flat? Can I have a motion to adjourn? So moved. I second. All those in favor? I I I.

We are adjourned. Not too hit that hammer. I forget my Yeah.