|
The Fauquier County Zoning Ordinance authorizes the Zoning
Administrator or her representative to remove signs that
have been posted in the County’s right-of-ways. Under the
existing language of the Zoning Ordinance, when a sign is
pulled, notice must be sent to each sign owner (if
identifiable) and that the signs must be held for at least
30 days to allow the owner to claim the sign, with a small
fee ($5 plus $1 each day the sign was held).
In 2005, the County entered into an agreement with the
Virginia Department of Transportation authorizing staff to
pull the signs from the right-of-way, and since that time,
at the Board of Supervisors’ direction, Zoning staff has
proactively enforced this provision of the Zoning Ordinance
by conducting periodic sweeps to remove signs. In the two
years that staff has been pulling signs and sending notices,
only 6 signs have been claimed by owners after notice was
sent.
The Zoning Ordinance requirement to send notice to sign
owners adds significantly to the amount of staff time
required for the enforcement action in order to log each
sign as it is pulled, research addresses for sign owners,
and then prepare and send the notice.
Because the notice process is costly both in terms of staff
time and postage, with little or no value to either sign
owners or the County, this amendment seeks to remove the
requirement that notice be sent to owners of signs that are
pulled. In addition, in 2007 the
Board of Supervisors funded
a Litter Control Program to be developed and maintained by
the Office of Adult Court Services. The program utilizes
court ordered community service workers to combat the
ongoing problem with litter in the county. Zoning staff is
coordinating with Adult Court Services staff to utilize this
program to pull signs from the right-of-ways where litter is
being collected. This will significantly increase the
frequency and effectiveness of sign removal efforts on
right-of-ways, but utilizing this resource creates a
logistical problem related to notice. When Zoning Staff
pulls signs, each sign is listed in a log with its
identification information and location, providing the basis
for sending notice. It would be burdensome for the litter
control workers to take on this additional task. As an
interim measure, Zoning Staff will be sorting through the
signs collected each week by the Litter Control workers,
creating the log after-the-fact so that notice can be sent
in compliance with existing regulations. In addition, with
more signs being pulled because the litter control group
works 3 days a week, significant additional staff time will
be necessary to a) sort through the pile of signs and
identify information for notice and b) prepare the
additional volume of notices.
There is no legal requirement that notice be sent to owners
regarding the violations, but if the County wishes to pursue
zoning enforcement/legal action against the sign owners,
notice of violation is required. Staff would envision that
written notice would continue to be sent to the select group
of entities that are repeat violators, so that legal action
can be pursued if necessary for enforcement.
Staff would further note that VDOT routinely removes or
“runs over” signs in the right-of-way when doing
maintenance, with no notice given to sign owners.
If the Board of Supervisors would like to preserve the
opportunity for owners to retrieve their signs, an
alternative approach would be for the County to hold the
signs for 30 days without providing individual notice. This
would allow anyone who wanted to retrieve a sign that was
removed to contact the County and retrieve the sign within
30 days, while still eliminating the cost and time
associated with providing individual notice in every case.
The text of the proposed revision is attached. Staff would
note that the same language is repeated twice within the
Ordinance, once in the general section on signs and once in
the special section on signs for planned development.
The Planning Commission initiated the proposed amendment on
August 30, 2007. After holding a public hearing on the item
on September 27, 2007, the Planning Commission unanimously
recommended approval.
|