Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

The LaGrange City Council is considering a recommendation from the planning commission to amend the sign ordinance.

During the Dec. 9 Board of Planning and Zoning Appeals  meeting, the board unanimously recommended modifying the sign ordinance to clarify who is responsible for applying for a sign permit.

City Planner Mark Kostial explained property owners are always eligible to apply for the permit, but the issue comes when someone installs the sign for them and neither the owner, nor the installer seeks a permit.

“Currently, what we’re having is the individual(s) fabricating and installing the sign are claiming that they thought the property owner was going to get or submit the application. And conversely, the property owner is saying, I entered into a contract with the business owner, and we were under the impression that they were going to submit the application. At the end of the day, we’ve had multiple unpermitted signs installed,” Kostial said.

The proposed amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) would say  applications for sign permits must be submitted by the person or company fabricating or installing the sign on behalf of the property owner or by the property owner if the owner installs the sign.

Councilman Nathan Gaskin pushed back on the proposed change, saying that the property owner should be responsible for all permits and documents and suggested that businesses should be given a sign permit application when they apply for a business license.

“If someone comes in for a business license and you ask them what kind of business, that should automatically trigger an application that is given to them for a sign. There are not too many businesses that are commercially located —I’m not talking about home businesses— but commercially located businesses that do not include a sign of some sort,” Gaskin said.

Mayor Jim Arrington suggested that giving new businesses a sign permit application was potentially a good idea but noted existing businesses also need to get new permits when they want another sign or upgrade an existing one.

Councilwoman Darby Pippin said that contractors are already responsible for getting permits in other situations.

“It’s already the same with building permits. If you have someone building a home for you, the builder is going to get it, even if it’s on your property. So that’s consistent with the way other permitting is done,” Pippin said.

Kostial said that majority of businesses that come for annual business permits already have existing signage, and they don’t intend to update it. For sign refacings where they just want to refresh their sign, an existing business may or may not be inclined to do that but they are required to do so.

“They may or may not [get a permit], so the question becomes, who is ultimately responsible? Currently, nobody’s responsible, because everybody’s responsible. What we’re trying to do is clear it up and say that at the end of the day, the property owners, they’re responsible. Or whoever fabricates and installs their signs,” Kostial said.

A first reading was held for the potential UDO amendment on Jan. 14 but no vote was taken. The issue is expected to come up for a vote at the Jan. 28 council meeting.