THIS IS AN ARCHIVE OF LAKE TAHOE NEWS, WHICH WAS OPERATIONAL FROM 2009-2018. IT IS FREELY AVAILABLE FOR RESEARCH. THE WEBSITE IS NO LONGER UPDATED WITH NEW ARTICLES.
I like the idea of limiting the height and maybe the size. Signs help people find things. When I was selling photos with the Tahoe Art League at the local street fairs we were unable to use signs to let people know we had art for sale. Maybe art customers on their way to the art galleries at Stateline would have stopped had they known we had art for sale.
dryclean says - Posted: October 5, 2011
Maybe bigger, tackier and more numerous signs will re-enforce our Kmart image and drive away more tourists who are looking to find a nice, scenic place to vacation.
Tourists will use the web and expertise from the chamber, LTVA and most importantly, front line lodging employees to find things to do. If your business is not keeping these entities informed you are just plain lazy.
Let the TRPA enforce their own regs and stop harassing local businesses with stupid ordinances from the socialists and nannies on the city council.
dumbfounded says - Posted: October 5, 2011
Government should stay the heck out of our way. The LAST thing they need to worry about is signs in our town. Until the potholes are fixed, the budget is balanced and unemployment is near zero, stop screwing around! If it truly becomes a problem, let a business group put together recommendations. Otherwise, let it go. We have far more important things to spend time on.
greatfull for what I have says - Posted: October 5, 2011
If a sign is falling apart and falling down or jsut plain unreadable than it should be taken down. There are so many ugly falling apart signs along lake tahoe blve. It says something about the lack of respect for our community as a whole. If a sign is no longer relevant than it should be taken down.
John W. Runnels says - Posted: October 6, 2011
No required sign change until the business changes the primary product or services it offers to the community or until a business closes its doors. New businesses depend upon a new look which a new sign helps promote. Existing businesses signs should be grandfathered until that time of change. This would save struggling owners of existing businesses from the not inconsequential cost of a sign redesign and change. It would also preserve sites of “Old Tahoe” while slowing the Cities mandated march toward the cookie cutter sameness found in most communities, engendered by Orwellian sign ordinances.
Pine Tree says - Posted: October 6, 2011
They need to be taller than the snow banks. All business on the parcel deserve to be put on a sign for the center without being called a change,and I agree with J.R. on the rest of the issues.
Ajctahoe says - Posted: October 7, 2011
All signs need to be taller than the snowbanks, and should be required to be changed when the property changes businesses or owners. That way the signs are kept up to date and it’s not a grey area as to when changing needs to happen. Also signs should only be allowed on that companies property, no off-property signs, it’s not right to the company that has to deal with a sign that’s not theirs.
dogwoman says - Posted: October 7, 2011
No signs on public property. And that includes campaign signs and yard sale signs on the public greenways and telephone poles. If you want to pay someone rent to put a sign on their property, fine. If your sign is on your property, fine.
That’s all.
Tahoan25 says - Posted: October 7, 2011
Just don’t use any of the city’s reserve for this continued sign nonsense by the council. Amazing the amount of common sense in most of these postings.
lou pierini says - Posted: October 8, 2011
All rules have to be the same. Let TRPA enforce their rules without local taxpayer money being used. SLT is the only gov. in TRPA boundries that has its own sign ord. We can’t afford it and don’t want it.
30yrlocal says - Posted: October 9, 2011
I feel cities that don’t want to look like a tacky strip mall need to have an ordinance in place so people know the rules before they pay to put up a sign.
Some of these comments seem to reflect thoughts that we’re the only ones contemplating an ordinance. I’ve only lived in 3 cities in my life so don’t know everything of course, but the other 2 towns both had cut and clear rules and a resulting nice look. San Luis Obispo has this in place: http://www.slocity.org/communitydevelopment/download/signregs.10.07.04.pdf. Not a bad model to follow.
My issue with this: Just decide and move on. Too much time has been sent on talking about regulations for years. Just do it!
Skibum says - Posted: October 9, 2011
30, We actually have an ordinance in place that is similar to the one you posted only it basically fits Tahoe. You are very much correct that we should decide. This current council has allready fallen into the problems the past councils have faced for over 46 years, they can’t count to three and get a concensus between all of them. Angela hit the nail on the head last year when she made a comment “I hope this isn’t turning into a boy girl thing” I don’t think it is getting to that yet, it’s more of five well meaning individuals who happen to live within the city limits representing five different powerfull groups holding sway over their decisions. Until the other approx 15,000 residents who didn’t vote start to call them, show up at meetings and make their feelings known it will be business as usual. You brought up some very valid points.
Not Born on the Bayou says - Posted: October 11, 2011
There is nothing that makes a town look tackier than cheap, ugly, old beat up signage along the main drag.
It is relatively one of the best bangs for the buck to clean that up to present an impression that all can appreciate – newcomers, tourists, and locals.
Doesn’t need to be expensive. Follow the guidelines and install the minimum necessary where cost is an issue.
Visit some towns that have done this. The difference will amaze you (Try Breckenridge or any of the ski towns in Colorado).
South Lake is only being held back by its own stubbornness and intransigence.
I like the idea of limiting the height and maybe the size. Signs help people find things. When I was selling photos with the Tahoe Art League at the local street fairs we were unable to use signs to let people know we had art for sale. Maybe art customers on their way to the art galleries at Stateline would have stopped had they known we had art for sale.
Maybe bigger, tackier and more numerous signs will re-enforce our Kmart image and drive away more tourists who are looking to find a nice, scenic place to vacation.
Tourists will use the web and expertise from the chamber, LTVA and most importantly, front line lodging employees to find things to do. If your business is not keeping these entities informed you are just plain lazy.
Let the TRPA enforce their own regs and stop harassing local businesses with stupid ordinances from the socialists and nannies on the city council.
Government should stay the heck out of our way. The LAST thing they need to worry about is signs in our town. Until the potholes are fixed, the budget is balanced and unemployment is near zero, stop screwing around! If it truly becomes a problem, let a business group put together recommendations. Otherwise, let it go. We have far more important things to spend time on.
If a sign is falling apart and falling down or jsut plain unreadable than it should be taken down. There are so many ugly falling apart signs along lake tahoe blve. It says something about the lack of respect for our community as a whole. If a sign is no longer relevant than it should be taken down.
No required sign change until the business changes the primary product or services it offers to the community or until a business closes its doors. New businesses depend upon a new look which a new sign helps promote. Existing businesses signs should be grandfathered until that time of change. This would save struggling owners of existing businesses from the not inconsequential cost of a sign redesign and change. It would also preserve sites of “Old Tahoe” while slowing the Cities mandated march toward the cookie cutter sameness found in most communities, engendered by Orwellian sign ordinances.
They need to be taller than the snow banks. All business on the parcel deserve to be put on a sign for the center without being called a change,and I agree with J.R. on the rest of the issues.
All signs need to be taller than the snowbanks, and should be required to be changed when the property changes businesses or owners. That way the signs are kept up to date and it’s not a grey area as to when changing needs to happen. Also signs should only be allowed on that companies property, no off-property signs, it’s not right to the company that has to deal with a sign that’s not theirs.
No signs on public property. And that includes campaign signs and yard sale signs on the public greenways and telephone poles. If you want to pay someone rent to put a sign on their property, fine. If your sign is on your property, fine.
That’s all.
Just don’t use any of the city’s reserve for this continued sign nonsense by the council. Amazing the amount of common sense in most of these postings.
All rules have to be the same. Let TRPA enforce their rules without local taxpayer money being used. SLT is the only gov. in TRPA boundries that has its own sign ord. We can’t afford it and don’t want it.
I feel cities that don’t want to look like a tacky strip mall need to have an ordinance in place so people know the rules before they pay to put up a sign.
Some of these comments seem to reflect thoughts that we’re the only ones contemplating an ordinance. I’ve only lived in 3 cities in my life so don’t know everything of course, but the other 2 towns both had cut and clear rules and a resulting nice look. San Luis Obispo has this in place: http://www.slocity.org/communitydevelopment/download/signregs.10.07.04.pdf. Not a bad model to follow.
My issue with this: Just decide and move on. Too much time has been sent on talking about regulations for years. Just do it!
30, We actually have an ordinance in place that is similar to the one you posted only it basically fits Tahoe. You are very much correct that we should decide. This current council has allready fallen into the problems the past councils have faced for over 46 years, they can’t count to three and get a concensus between all of them. Angela hit the nail on the head last year when she made a comment “I hope this isn’t turning into a boy girl thing” I don’t think it is getting to that yet, it’s more of five well meaning individuals who happen to live within the city limits representing five different powerfull groups holding sway over their decisions. Until the other approx 15,000 residents who didn’t vote start to call them, show up at meetings and make their feelings known it will be business as usual. You brought up some very valid points.
Sure/$?
There is nothing that makes a town look tackier than cheap, ugly, old beat up signage along the main drag.
It is relatively one of the best bangs for the buck to clean that up to present an impression that all can appreciate – newcomers, tourists, and locals.
Doesn’t need to be expensive. Follow the guidelines and install the minimum necessary where cost is an issue.
Visit some towns that have done this. The difference will amaze you (Try Breckenridge or any of the ski towns in Colorado).
South Lake is only being held back by its own stubbornness and intransigence.
Where’s the pride?