TOPSHAM — The public will have a chance tonight to tell the Planning Board what they think of three proposed ordinance amendments slated to go to voters at the May town meeting.

A public hearing starts at 7 p.m. today at the municipal building, 100 Main St. If the Planning Board sends the ordinance to the Board of Selectmen and selectmen place it on the town meeting warrant, another chance to discuss it will be offered on April 19, during a public hearing on all town meeting warrant items.

The Planning Board has been working for several months to rewrite the town’s entire sign ordinance. John Shattuck, the town’s economic and community development director, said the resulting proposed ordinance represents a broad, comprehensive update of municipal code regulating signs in town.

Through the re- write process, there has been very little participation by businesses in town, Shattuck said, — or from residents, added Town Planner Rich Roedner. He and Shattuck met with a reporter last week to talk about the proposed new ordinance, which is expected to go to the May 16 town meeting.

The ordinance revision came about because at the last two annual town meetings, voters rejected three sign proposals and one other zoning proposal involving signs, Roedner said.

“What was recommended was that rather than these kind of piecemeal changes, we come back with a comprehensive set of amendments to our sign code,” Roedner said. “The existing ordinance we had was not organized well. A lot of terms were defined in the text of the ordinance, so we’ve taken all of that out of the ordinance and put it in our definitions.”

A whole new section concerning non-conformance is included in the new language. If you have a non-conforming sign, Roedner said, and if you go out of business, the sign has to be taken down within two years.

If you have a non-conforming sign and you have a significant change of use that would require a site plan review, you have to make your sign conform.

If you have to make structural changes to the sign or sign supports, at that time you have to make the sign conforming.

If you have a non-conforming sign along with a non-conforming use, when the property is sold to a new owner, Roedner said, you have to make the sign conform.

“Barring everything else,” Roedner said, if you have a non-conforming sign, “at the end of 10 years, you have to replace your sign — 10 years from the date the ordinance is adopted.”

Significant project developments are allowed to have a sign at the end of the road to list all the tenants, in addition to the individual business signs. Sign size regulations are based on the square footage of the project, Roedner said.

Amendments involving electronic message centers have been voted down the past two years at town meeting, Roedner said. During the re-write process, the Planning Board decided there is a place for electronic message signs in the Mixed Use Commercial districts — the Topsham Fair Mall and the zone on the west side of Interstate 295 opposite the mall. The electronic message center signs would be behind the frontage lots along Route 196 that fall in a different zone.

“The other big change,” Roedner said, is that as proposed, “other than sandwich board ( A- frame) signs, the board is eliminating temporary signs.”

Roedner believes the proposed new sign ordinance is more clear and easy to use.

“In some cases, where appropriate, I think it allows for at least as much signage as was allowed before, perhaps in some cases more,” he said. “And in other cases, it reduces the amount of signage that’s allowed where it’s not appropriate.”

Shattuck noted size of signs is always an issue for businesses.

“Whether or not this is a big deal for businesses, it’s a change,” which businesses will want to be aware of, Shattuck said.

Historic district overlay

A public hearing also will be held on proposed changes to rules regarding the Historic District Overlay, which works to maintain the historic, architectural and overall visual character in areas of town with a significant number of properties of historic significance.

Assistant Town Planner Rod Melanson said the proposed ordinance stems from the comprehensive plan that requires the town to survey identifying contributing and non-contributing properties in the Historic Overlay District.

This has been a multi-year process that has included an architectural survey, Melanson said. The resulting proposed ordinance accomplishes the major components of setting up different standards for contributing and non-contributing properties. It also clarifies the Historic District Overlay District map by consolidation of the existing five districts into one district and listing each parcel within the district.

The process has been amended to clarify what goes to the Historic District Commission and what does not.

Melanson said the commission has added a section to the ordinance about exempt activities in a list format, but he emphasized a determination must still be made by the planning office on exempt activities.

The other major addition is the definitions of certain terminology.

Subdivisions

Amendments to the subdivision ordinance also are proposed in an effort to implement recommendations of the Natural Areas Plan, which is part of the town’s comprehensive plan.

The plan makes recommendations with respect to how subdivisions should be treated to better protect the town’s natural resources while providing rural landowners more flexibility if they choose to develop their land, according to an overview of the changes found on the town website.

A major recommendation in the Natural Areas Plan reflected in the amendment is requirement of a pre-application site inventory and analysis process to assure that subdivisions are designed taking into account the natural resources on the property.

Proposed new language says rural subdivisions in the Rural Residential (R-3) District can be done as conventional subdivisions meeting the current standards; as open space subdivisions in which part of the subdivision is set aside as permanent open space; or as large lot subdivisions with reduced requirements for road access.

Additional recommendations are addressed in the proposed amendments, which can be found on the town website.

The proposed ordinances up for public comment this evening, and overview documents, can be found on the town’s website, www.topshammaine.com, by clicking on the “NEWS Updates” link.

dmoore@timesrecord.com