New sign code debated at public hearing

A real sign of the times in Hamlin may be that signs will have new rules to follow. In the second half of a public hearing double header Monday, April 29, the town board listened as local residents gave their thoughts on proposed modifications to codes regarding signage.

Larry Gursslin, Hamlin’s code enforcement officer, chaired a committee that was commissioned to review the code. Gursslin was on hand at the Monday night meeting to answer any questions regarding the modifications.

"I feel like the new code is about a 10 percent change to the law," said Gursslin. "I think you’ll find the majority of the law to still be intact." Most of the changes, Gursslin said, were to become more user friendly and simpler to enforce.

"We made minor modifications to some areas of the law," said Gursslin. "One of the areas that was changed was the creation of an area called agricultural signs, other changes were to allow more flexibility for not-for-profits."

Councilman Ed Evans said the need for code revision also arose because the old laws had many loopholes. Overall, Evans said he thought these holes had been plugged.

"I’m not claiming that this job is the best sign ordinance ever, but I think it is a heck of a lot better than the one we had," Evans said.

However, not everyone in the meeting was in agreement with Evans.

Peter Tonery, of Moscow Road, said the new code was significantly flawed. Tonery said he had reviewed the sign codes for both Hilton and Spencerport and found that Hamlin’s was the least restrictive.

Tonery said he was particularly concerned with the lack of restrictions on agricultural signs and the allowance of multiple pennants, banners, spinners, streamers, flags, moving signs or flashing reflective, animated or rotating signs or similar eye-catching devices in commercial and industrial areas.

"This is a very bad idea," said Tonery. "This is going to attract the type of businesses that we don’t want in Hamlin."

Councilperson Shirley Hollink also voiced some concerns. Hollink said she was upset by what she felt was bad communication of the newly proposed code.

Supervisor Austin Warner said he was surprised by Hollink’s concerns. "After previous meetings I was under the assumption that everyone on the board was comfortable with this," said Warner.

The committee that worked on the revisions was chaired by Gursslin and included Austin Warner, Frank Mastrodonato, Mark Kronenberg, Dane Emens, Norm Baase and Dean Brightley.

Gursslin said the proposed sign code should see some slight revisions as a result of the public hearing and would more than likely be voted on at the next town board meeting.