The Oak Ridge City Council will discuss proposed changes to the city’s electronic sign ordinance during a Monday evening work session. Pictured above is Toney Stevens of Rivers Total Car Care, who has participated in the discussion.
The Oak Ridge City Council on Monday will discuss a proposed ordinance that would prohibit animated video and scrolling messages on electronic signs.
Council will also discuss economic development options related to a public-private partnership on Oak Ridge Mall properties, and commercial and industrial areas of the city.
During a non-voting work session Monday night, Council will also hear a presentation on land bank legislation. The work session starts at 7 p.m. in the Multipurpose Room at the Central Services Complex on Woodbury Lane.
The proposed changes to the city’s sign ordinance have been under discussion for about six months.
The Oak Ridge Municipal Planning Commission recommended some changes to the City Council in a 7-1 vote on June 20. The recommended changes would require messages displayed on the electronic signs to be static and displayed for at least five seconds. When located on the ground, the electronic signs would have to be at least 100 feet away from homes, residential zoning districts, or public parks. Signs on poles would have to be at least 200 feet away.
The proposed ordinance changes would also govern the brightness of the signs and require them to automatically dim using photo cell technology. They would also govern the use of signs at athletic fields and for recreational and sporting venues within publicly owned spaces. More information on the proposed changes is available in the City Council work session agenda.
Business owners have called the electronic signs effective, a great way to get out their messages. But a few residents have said they’re distracting and offensive, at least in some cases. Caught in the middle, Oak Ridge officials have been asked to try to strike a balance between businesses and the community.
The existing sign regulations were adopted in 2003, and city officials first proposed changes to the sign ordinance late last year, saying the regulations need to be updated in response to new technologies and marketing trends. But the changes and the earlier process used by the city were publicly opposed by several business owners, and the initial ordinance recommendations were taken off the table.
The Oak Ridge Chamber of Commerce announced in February that a North Carolina company had signed a contract to purchase the Oak Ridge Mall, also known as Oak Ridge City Center.
The discussion of economic development on Monday will be led by Oak Ridge City Manager Mark Watson with help from consultants Ray Evans and Steve Jones.
Crosland Southeast, a development and investment company headquartered in Charlotte, N.C., signed a contract to purchase the mostly empty Oak Ridge Mall from Oak Ridge City Center LLC in late January.
City officials have said potential developers at the mall were likely to ask for public money to help pay for infrastructure improvements ranging from rerouted roadways and new traffic lights to building upgrades and property demolition.
“It will unquestionably be required,” Evans said in February. “Every prospect said the deal can’t work unless there is some public-private participation.”
But any potential public involvement that could be required hasn’t been spelled out yet.
A presentation and overview of the land bank legislation will be led by Watson; Matt Widner, City Housing Remediation Specialist; City Attorney Ken Krushenski; and Charlie Jernigan, Oak Ridge Housing Authority board member.
The briefing will consist of present legislation as approved by the 2012 Tennessee General Assembly in Nashville and the development of pilot projects for Tennessee.
The work session agenda is available here.
David A. Vudragovich says
The more I drive by Illinois and the Turnpike area the less I notice the signs. (guess I know how to ignore things that do not interest me). Being in Pittsburgh, PA over the weekend, I actually like the businesses being much closer to the street, it is easier to find them and get into their parking lots (Banksville Road in particular). One of the leading complaints I had when I move to TN in 2010 was how hard to figure out which shopping center a store was in while driving (being new to the area). It IS distracting (risk of accident from lack of signage) and requires more time with my eyes not on the road (hence I am not a fan of Turkey Creek). Want more business in Oak Ridge, make it easier for them to do business (customers know they are there and find them). Also, I say this from the point of having been at and heard what the planning committee talks about doing for HOURS during Thursday night meetings.
Sam Hopwood says
Pretty much agree. With the exception of the loan sharking sign on South Illinois this is much ado about nothing…. Just my view.
Bill Issel says
Have you not seen the Riverview Grille sign that people in The Rivers have to live with? It’s like living next door to a casino.
Kay Williamson says
i had problems with no parking at my house, i was told if you don’t like it MOVE…
Andrew Howe says
There are basically just two issues relating to electronic signage, which both should easily be addressed and corrected without anyone getting too bent out of shape.
1) Light pollution – they can be simply too bright for the area, thus the 100/200 foot distance.
2) Driving distraction – they DO indeed distract at times, thus the 5 second static display time
Most of existing eSigns in town don’t have a problem with light pollution – and I suspect the only real bad example is the Riverside Grill. Their sign looks to be within 100 feet of the nearest home. So they may need to dim the side facing the homes. Worse case scenario, they may need to relocate the sign further down Melton Lake Drive.
When I drive that road after dark, I do find that sign to be brighter than it need be (and somewhat blinding if I’m coming out of the darker area south of the restaurant). But no brighter than most headlights, really.
I fully can attest to being distracted by rapidly changing eSigns, especially if they are very bright. I’d be surprised of owners had muc complaints about slowing down the animations. It might make some graphics appear odd, but with so many ‘graphic’ options I’d hope that slight drawback wouldn’t upset owners much.
In short, this is about being fair to our neighbors and having safe roads. I’d hope that any current and future eSign owner would understand this and willingly adjust for the betterment of all.
It ISN’T fair that sign owners have to change their signs to meet rules that didn’t exist when the signs were purchases, so I fully sympathize with them on this. Unfortunately, it kind of has to be done. New tech often proceeds new rules.
If an owner has a problem meeting the city’s rules, I’d also absolutely hope the city does everything the best that it can to find a resolution that pleases both sides.
If that fails, call me and I’ll see what I can’t do to help.
We’re all in this together.
David A. Vudragovich says
On the brightness, there is nit picking…er…nit measurements that are looking at being set as standards. Apparently most signs (made today) can automatically adjust (storm blows through) and as the sun sets.
On “…eSign owner would understand this…” it is a sign of the business owner, management. If they care they should find a happy medium and not piss off their customers and neighbors. (bad business in my book). The sign Sam mentions above, I have not seen change since this started and if I ever have a client in need, I will intentionally refer them else where. I try to not recommend businesses I do not respect.
Didn’t the Riverside start to turn their sign off after hours? They did do that voluntarily.
Jacob Wadsworth says
I don’t see the need for those changes because they aren’t that significant anyway. There are more pressing problems that the council needs to be addressing rather than distance of the posts from houses. – http://www.inlighten.net/