? Community Information Meeting Thursday, April 14, 2016 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Roadside Signage on Gabriola Island ? Community Information Meeting Thursday, April 14, 2016 Agricultural Hall, Gabriola 6:00 – 8:00 pm

Purpose of this Meeting 1. To publicly share and receive feedback on the results of the Roadside Signage survey ; and 2. To have a group discussion around possible next steps for where to go from here

Gabriola Island Roadside Signage Survey Results 486 Total Responses 312 Survey Monkey online & 174 paper-based

Question 1: Answered: 469 Skipped: 17 Are you a resident of Gabriola Island? 3% Yes No 97%

Question 2: Answered: 405 Skipped: 81 Please select all that apply: I am an owner or operator of a home-based business on Gabriola Island 28% I am an owner or operator of a commercial, industrial, or institutional business on Gabriola 65% Island (non-residential) 7% I am not an owner or operator of a business on Gabriola Island

Question 3: Safety and visibility of pedestrians/cyclists Safety and visibility of motorists Aesthetics Rural Character Directing traffic to commercial/industrial/institutional businesses Directing traffic to home-based businesses Advertising commercial/industrial/institutional businesses Advertising home-based businesses Promoting special events Answered: 482 Skipped: 4 0 1 2 3 4 5

4. To what extent do you agree with the following statements? Signs should be permitted along road rights-of-way for the purpose of directing traffic to commercial / industrial / institutional businesses Signs should be permitted along road rights-of-way for the purpose of directing traffic to home-based businesses Signs should be permitted along roadways for the purpose of promoting special events Sign design should conform to the MOTI provincial standard and guidelines Sign design should reflect the “uniqueness” of Gabriola to go outside the provincial sign standards and incorporate materials and designs by local artisans and crafts people Answered: 480 Skipped: 6 0 1 2 3 4 5

Question 5: Answered: 476 Skipped: 10 Thinking about the location of existing sandwich board signs on Ferry Hill, please select the statement with which you most agree: All sandwich boards are unacceptable and should be removed 13% 23% The existing sandwich board signs are acceptable in their current locations 18% The existing sandwich board signs are acceptable but they should be consolidated 46% into one well-marked location Other (please explain):

Question 6: Answered: 475 Skipped: 11 Thinking about the size of existing sandwich board signs on Ferry Hill, please select the statement with which you most agree: All sandwich boards are unacceptable 9% and should be removed The existing sandwich board signs are 14% 25% acceptable in size 2% The existing sandwich board signs should be smaller The existing sandwich board signs 50% should be larger Other (please explain):

Question 7: Answered: 469 Skipped: 17 Do you support amending OCP policies concerning roadside signage? 21% Yes 42% No Unsure 37%

Question 8: Answered: 469 Skipped: 17 Which of the following best suits your opinion of this regulation? 5% 15% Too big Too small 42% Just right 38% Unsure

Question 9: Question 10: Do you believe that Do you believe that "obsolete" signs should be "derelict" signs should be removed? removed? 4% 2% 15% 15% Yes Yes No No 83% 81% Unsure Unsure Answered: 473 Skipped: 13 Answered: 474 Skipped: 12

Question 11: Question 12: Do you support amending the LUB to include Do you support amending the LUB to specific development guidelines to address include more specific regulations for the aesthetic appearance of permanent permanent roadside signage? roadside signage? 14% 17% Yes Yes 48% 49% No No Unsure 38% Unsure 34% Answered: 467 Skipped: 19 Answered: 468 Skipped: 18

Question 13: (See Survey Results handout for complete list of comments)

Question 14: Question 15: Do you support the concept Do you support the concept of group/multi-party signage of group/multi-party signage to provide directions to for business advertising? businesses? Yes 8% Yes 9% No No 30% 51% 41% 61% Other Other (please (please explain): explain): Answered: 464 Skipped: 22 Answered: 464 Skipped: 22

Question 16: Which of the following locations do you think would be suitable for group/multi-party signs (please select all that apply)? A. Near the Haven / Twin Beaches Mall Area B. Ferry Hill Area (int. of North/Taylor Bay Rd) C. Wishbone Area / Post Office corner Business Directional D. Horseshoe Triangle and Barrett Road E. Dragon's Lodge Area Business F. Silva Bay Area Advertising G. Drumbeg Park / Degnen Bay Area 0% 20% 40% 60% Answered: 348 Skipped: 138

Question 17: (See Survey Results handout for complete list of comments)

Clear Direction from Survey Responses: • Strong feedback to say that both “obsolete” and “derelict” signs should be removed • Most important concern for roadside signage: safety and visibility (for pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists) • Least important purpose of roadside signage: advertising for businesses of any kind • Roadside signs should be permitted for the purpose of promoting special events (MOTI already has process to apply to put up temporary (not permanent) signs in the right-of-way) • Strong support of the concept of group/multi-party signs for providing directions to businesses - With preferred locations being: - Ferry Hill, - Wishbone/Post Office corner, - Silva Bay, and - Near the Haven/Malaspina Galleries/Gabriola Sands/Twin Beaches Mall

Unclear Direction from Survey Responses: • Roadside sign design to conform to MOTI provincial standards and guidelines, or reflect the “uniqueness” of Gabriola ? • Half of respondents agreed that the existing sandwich board signs are acceptable in their current size and locations . • 38% felt that the current sign size regulation of 0.3 square metres (3.2 square feet) was just right, but another 42% felt it should actually be bigger . ( What to do…?) • Respondents were split on amending Official Community Plan policies for roadside signage, ( Many unsure and/or wanting to know first what the proposed changes might be) • Nearly half supported amending the Land Use Bylaw with regards to permanent roadside signage : both to include more specific regulations, and also to include specific development guidelines to address the aesthetic appearance. • Preferred locations for group/multi-party signs for business advertising : less than 40% agreement on any of the suggested locations (even though more than half supported the concept)

Group Discussion for Next Steps… • Tonight let’s aim to answer the question: so where do we go from here? • Next Local Trust Committee meeting: • Thursday, May 26 th (10:15 am at Gabriola Arts & Heritage Centre - 476 South Rd) • Staff will present draft recommendations for Roadside Signage Strategy • Public welcome to attend!

Questions for Discussion 1. Personally, what do the results mean to you ? 2. Which are the most important items to address ? (think about clear vs. unclear direction…) 3. What will be the next steps in terms of implementation ? (how can we achieve a “For Gabriola, by Gabriola” solution here?)

Example of Signage from Thetis Island (near the ferry, at the T-intersection)