This is a printer-friendly version of an article from Zip06.com.
05/10/2017 09:00 AMWhat sort of signage is appropriate in Guilford? That is the question raised by a proposed amendment to the zoning code that would allow digital display signs on town property, which was brought before the Planning & Zoning Commission (PZC) on May 3. After a short discussion, the commission quickly found the proposal too thorny and sent the amendment back to the Zoning Committee for further discussion.
The proposed amendment would alter the section of town code pertaining to signs. The amendment would allow for the use of digital display signs that use LED technology for public notices and messages. The sign would be subject to standards and conditions including that the sign would be no larger than 50 square feet; there would be a ban on commercial messages; and the location would be limited to town or state property.
While the PZC did not engage in a full discussion, Town Planner George Kral presented the proposed amendment to the board. Kral said the amendment was proposed by the Selectmen’s Office to provide an alternative to the banner that sometimes hangs across Route 1. Kral said the banner has caused some disputes over which organizations can hang a banner. The signage has also raised safety concerns as the banner has, at times, come loose.
“From time to time you may have seen it advertising public non-profit events such as the Lobster Fest and Guilford Arts Festival,” he said of the banner. “The town has determined that is no longer a desirable way of allowing this type of advertising and would like to allow this LED vision display type technology to be used in its place.”
Kral said the sign might be similar to the one in front of the Clinton Town Hall, but there is currently no proposed location for the sign in town. Kral said the town engineer has looked into costs and design for the sign and, since it would have to be located on town or state property, some location options could include in front of Police and Fire Headquarters or Adams Middle School, both located on Church Street.
“I have heard it said that it would not be located on the Green,” Kral said.
Commissioners raised concerns over location, design, and commercial usage. Commissioner Rich Meier brought up the moving billboard debate held in town years ago and rehashed some of the safety arguments brought up then.
“I saw a couple of commissioners brought up that there is an increase in automobile accidents in the location of these signs because they pull your attention away from driving,” he said. “If it is distracting and one of our primary responsibilities is to protect the safety of the town, how can we justify passing this?”
Most other commissioners declined to engage in a safety debate without scientific evidence, but Meier also brought up the issue of taste.
“It is plausible in the wording of this that we could have one of the signs that are over the highway over Route 1 saying ‘Come on down to the fish fry’,” he said.
Kral said that type of display was highly unlikely, but with commissioners acknowledging that this proposal is likely to be contentious and controversial, PZC voted to send the proposal back to the Zoning Committee to flesh out the proposal further with the first selectman and the Guilford Preservation Alliance (GPA).
GPA President Shirley Girioni attended the meeting with a letter from the GPA, outlining the alliance’s concerns over the proposal, including the visual impact of such signage and its direct conflict with the historic nature of the town. Girioni said she was pleased the proposal will receive more debate before a PZC vote.
“This is a very thoughtful and inclusive decision,” she said.