Mandeville considers sign changes

By Suzanne Le Breton
Contributing Writer
Published on Friday, July 17, 2009 9:27 AM CDT



The city of Mandeville is reworking its regulations governing signage in the city.

The city’s sign ordinance was written more than 20 years ago, and Zoning Chairman Nixon Adams said while it was lauded as forwarded thinking when it was written, it is outdated now.

Planning staff members Lori Spranley and John Endres regularly work with business owners applying for sign permits, and they told the Planning and Zoning Commission Tuesday night the existing ordinance is very ambiguous on certain items.

The commission has been charged with clearing up those fuzzy areas as well as to update the ordinance.

The commission will hold work sessions to develop some proposed changes and will hold public hearings to gather input on those proposed changes before making a recommendation to the City Council.

Planning Director Louisette Kidd said the purpose of a sign ordinance is to prevent visual clutter.

“The sign ordinance and the live oak protection ordinance (the city adopted) back in the 80s really started Mandeville’s reputation,” Adams told his fellow commissioners. “A good sign ordinance can really make a lot of difference.”

With that, the first area Kidd suggested the commission look at is temporary signs, which includes real estate signs, construction project signs, political signs and window signs.

As the property values increase, Kidd said, she anticipates more multi-story buildings being constructed in the city, and she proposed looking at the city’s sign regulations for multi-story buildings.

Currently the city has two separate guidelines for professional and retail establishments, and in multi-tenant buildings retail establishments are allowed to have larger signs than office buildings, which also include doctors’ offices.

“It’s really unfair,” Kidd told the commission, and suggested that too be examined.

Endres said the commission needs to also consider what to do for interior office spaces, which are not addressed in the current regulations.

Mandeville started the use of monument signs on the Northshore by requiring them along its gateways, but Kidd said the definition of what is a monument sign is not clearly defined. She asked the commission to look into whether they want to allow low-profile pole signs with landscaping or whether they want all monument signs to be flush with the ground.

The commission will also look at directional signage.

Endres said that many businesses are putting up directional signage that includes their company logo on it, and therefore, he said, it should be included in their sign package and such signs should require a permit.

Other items that will be discussed include murals and artwork on buildings, billboards, a new amortization period for businesses to come into compliance, signage inside the Old Mandeville area and fees.


Comments

2 comment(s)

    Signs Necessary wrote on Jul 26, 2009 10:37 PM:

    " Signs can be made to be visually appealing but are necessary. There is nothing worse for business than being unable to find a business because the signage is either too small to see while driving or is hidden behind trees.

    I have no problems with the 50 foot tall signs since at least you can see what is available without having to turn around after the fact. "

    Barbara Dorris wrote on Jul 20, 2009 11:35 AM:

    " I do not care for sign clutter. The first area I recall seeing where this issue was address was Westlake California. Later the Woodlands outside of Houston in Texas. Both of these areas were extraordinary because of the restrictions on sign clutter. My feeling is that we now have signs on Interstates advising what is available at the next stop. With that, why do we need signs on poles with the exception of TEMPORARY warning signs? "

WRITE A COMMENT

Use the form below to post a brief comment to this story, or respond to other readers. Please use the word count tool to assist you in keeping your remarks to 100 words or fewer.

Comment posters are responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. We urge comment writers to treat this as a public forum where manners matter. We encourage a collegial, non-insulting tone. All readers comments must be approved by our staff before posting to the Web site. They review submitted comments periodically during the day for offensive or off-topic content before posting. Be aware, in accordance with the Communications Decency Act and provisions upheld in judicial appeal, that you are responsible for comments posted on this Web site. The St. Tammany News is not liable for messages from third parties.

DO NOT POST:
* Potentially libelous statements or damaging innuendo.
* Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
* Personal attacks, insults or threats.
* The use of another person's real name to disguise your identity.
* Comments unrelated to the story.
* Personal Information (phone numbers, addresses, etc.)

Opinions, advice and all other information expressed in thesttammanynews.com's reader comments represent the individual's own views and not necessarily those of the St. Tammany News. The St. Tammany News does not endorse and is not responsible for statements, advice or opinions offered by anyone other than authorized St. Tammany News spokespersons.

Your thoughtful contribution to the online discussion is appreciated.

(optional)
Current Word Count: