CityView Portal
| We are sorry but no more comments are being taken for this case |
| Return to CityView Portal |
| Submitted comments will appear below after staff approval. | |
|---|---|
| Steven Ellis | 2/3/2005 9:51:31 AM |
| I support this ammedment to the sign ordinance. The public through their govenment has the right to regulate time place and manner of advertising. This is not a new idea to restrict the level of light for signs. Its only new to Anchorage. | |
| Chris Berg | 7/19/2004 11:18:57 AM |
| I agree that there need to be a limit on signage. It has gotten out of hand. Local residences end up losing value due to "no-limit" lighting and it also creates a problem for the business when another business one up's the others by placing a larger sign. | |
| dorothy randall | 6/28/2004 8:09:36 PM |
| Agree with a limit on illuminated signs on main streets. Directional lighting on sign should not be directed into oncoming traffic, I cite the barney chalet lighting on NLB. So much sign clutter you cannot see the roadway signs on Tudor Rd. | |
| leon butler | 4/20/2004 12:22:32 PM |
| The sign ordinances in Anchorage are already too tight. Businesses need to be able to advertise. If it is zoned for business, let them have more ability to design signs, size, height, and style should be allowed to flourish. I have lived here since 1975 and do not like the tendency of our local government to restrict small business. Thank you. | |
| Mikal Hendee | 4/14/2004 11:01:43 AM |
| I concurr with the proposed ordinance. Light pollution is a real problem and luminance of signs should have a standard. | |