Most of the readers responding to this week’s online poll — 65.2 percent —  thought that the city should not change its sign ordinance to allow freeway facing signs on shopping centers along Highway 101. About 35 percent thought the city should change the ordinance, and 3.5 percent weren’t sure.
Here were some of the comments.
——
“101 is being “uglified” enough, what with the sound walls, the humongous proposed interchange and a 45 feet tall retaining wall for the Petaluma Boulevard South exit, and the cutting down of hundreds of trees — and maybe even two, 64 foot storage silos and an asphalt plant to view as you come drive past Petaluma. Now throw in some giant commercial signage and what have you got? Blight — not the Redwood Empire we know and love.”
——
“Absolutely not! It’s ugly enough with all the trees that have been taken out so that we can see the stores along the freeway. We are starting to look like Anywhere, USA. Signs will just make it worse. What we need to do is plant new trees as soon as possible. The shopping centers knew all about our sign ordinance when they petitioned for approval. This is Petaluma, not San Jose.”
——
“If they don’t know they are here they won’t come to shop. Let’s promote our town and help the businesses grow!”
——
“Aren’t there signs on the freeway side of the outlet mall? Aren”t there signs on the freeway side of other buildings like club one and the auto mall?”
——
“Awful idea!”
——
“Bad for Petaluma.”
——
“The city should enforce what it has now and get the sandwich boards off the streets and not make concessions to the large box stores.:
——
“Does it really matter? I think the city should be focusing on fixing pot holes and getting the street lights turned back on.”
——
“Don’t want to be Rohnert Park or anywhere else. I want to live in Petaluma.”
——
“Do we need to look like Vacaville?”
——
“Evolve or die. California is the least business friendly state and Sonoma County is one of the least business friendly counties in the US.”
——
“For the specific project that is driving this issue, Regency, the developer agreed to have a berm planted with trees to block the unsightly view of the backs of the buildings — now they want this changed. They and supporters of allowing the signage have said it is necessary for the success of the project. I find it hard to believe that Regency was not aware of the ordinance when they proposed the project and to come in at the last minute and say they need it changed is disingenuous. No wonder people are becoming more and more cynical about big business and government.”