Limerick supervisors debate signage, address development concerns

The Limerick Board of Supervisors once again took up the issue of allowing electronic message signs in the township at Tuesday’s meeting, a subject that has been a point of contention many times.

The board’s main concern is that having many electronic signs will be detrimental to the appearance of the township’s streets.

However, in contrast to past discussions, the board now appears to be open to allowing electronic signs for local businesses.  At meetings in  and , during debate on a sign package for Tri-County Toyota’s used car sales building on Lewis Road, supervisors Thomas Neafcy and Joseph St. Pedro stated they were opposed to any type of electronic signage, with St. Pedro later amending his opinion to state that he thought electronic signs should only show the time and temperature.

John Yakscoe, president of Triton Signs Inc. of Pottstown, spoke before the board on electronic message signs. Yakscoe has been voluntarily serving as an expert consultant as the board has been working on new ordinances regulating the use of electronic signs.

Yakscoe explained that electronic signs are easier to read than other types of signs. Electronic signs are meant to “get your attention and deliver the message, and be done,” Yakscoe said. Supervisor Joseph St. Pedro said his main concern is how distracting a changing sign might be.

“There is no correlation between signage and traffic accidents,” Yakscoe said he  said that a driver will take only about three to five seconds to read a sign, and because brighter electronic signs get a driver’s attention faster, they are a “safer alternative than a stagnant sign.”

Responding to comments from several board members expressing concern that electronic signs would start appearing everywhere, Yakscoe also explained that electronic signs are expensive and may be out of reach for many business owners. “A typical 3 x 5 sign could be $14,000,” he said, which does not include any installation costs. Kara Shuler said the reality is that “not many will spend $20,000 on an electronic sign.”

“Then why are we talking about it?” asked St. Pedro. “We still have to have rules in place whether people can afford it or not,” Shuler said.

One resident said that he had done research on electronic signs before and was told that signs could be leased. Yakscoe said that was true, and that signs are usually leased over five or ten years with the lessee purchasing the sign at the end of the lease. “That would help with the cost to business owners,” St. Pedro said.

After several rounds of debate on what height would be allowed for the signs, whether or not the signs should have a base and what materials could be used to build a base, the board voted to advertise the sign ordinance and will take public comments under advisement when a public hearing is held. Township manager Dan Kerr and his staff will be looking at examples of this type of sign and will provide guidelines at a later date. Kerr said that his staff needs to look at possible sign configurations and figure out how to combine sign ordinances with the current streetscape plan.

The board also discussed an ordinance concerning placement of temporary signs such as banners, realtor open house signs and developer signs pointing to new housing subdivisions. Solicitor Joseph McGrory said that the current draft ordinance will ban all temporary signs.

Shuler asked about allowing temporary signs for non-profit agencies’ events like a Red Cross blood drive or the local fire company’s banner advertising their carnival. McGrory said that the ordinance cannot distinguish between for-profit and non-profit businesses because everyone must be treated equally.

However, anyone wishing to use a temporary sign can come in and apply for a variance and the board can opt to waive any application fees associated with that application.

Shuler said that the draft ordinance is “too conservative” for her. “There should be some way to help these agencies,” she said.

The board voted to table discussion on temporary signs until a future meeting.

In other business, the board voted to go forward with a plan to finish King Road and half of Metka Road and to repave Elio Circle. The project was previously bid out at approximately $400,000, but increased fuel and asphalt costs pushed the cost up to $484,000. The board decided to split the Metka Road construction in half to save some costs. King Road and Elio Circle will be completed, and Metka Road will be finished from the park entrance to the first bridge.

The township welcomed Tim Haas aboard as the new assistant zoning and code enforcement officer. Haas graduated from Penn State University with a bachelor of science in marketing and management and previously worked in zoning and code enforcement in New Hanover Township.

Township resident Linda Antonacci voiced concerns about the development of a ten-acre lot behind the William Penn Villas subdivision on Swamp Pike. Antonacci said she had been told that the land had been sold to a developer who would be putting 38 homes on the property and had requested an easement to run water lines through the William Penn Villas property.

Antonacci’s concern was that the developer would have to tear up the road to run the water line through her neighborhood and that the homeowners would have to bear the costs of repairing their road because the roads are not dedicated to the township. She was also concerned about the placement of the water line.

McGrory said that the township has not received any applications regarding the development of the property. Supervisor Ken Sperring said that the current zoning would only allow for maybe eight or none homes on those ten acres, and Neafcy stated that the developer would not get support for 38 homes from the board.

The board meeting closed with Supervisor Elaine DeWan commenting that she thinks it is good for the public to see the board working through issues. “We aren’t all in lock-step,” she said.