By Dave Fidlin
Correspondent
Nearly six years have passed since the town and village of Rochester consolidated into one municipality, and efforts to recognize the new arrangement continue.
The most recent issue concerns property address signs and whether there should now be uniformity throughout the village.
Most properties in the former township portion of the village are marked with reflective, colored signs displaying the property owner’s numbered address. The scenario is a throwback to an old town ordinance requiring the signs to be placed in front of each property.
But the so-called “original village,” with its denser population, never had any such provision on the books, and property owners have been free to display, or not display, their addresses as they see fit.
The Village Board on Feb. 9 discussed the possibility of creating a uniform address sign ordinance throughout the community as a way of ensuring emergency responders and other persons seeking out addresses can do so in a timely manner.
No formal action was taken and, after weighing the pros and cons, most board members asserted the blanket policy might not be the most savvy in today’s technological day and age.
“Are these signs as needed as they used to be?” Trustee Mike Weinkauf asked. “I just don’t think we should spend a ton of money placing all these little blue signs in front of these homes.”
With GPS technology widespread and Smartphones in the hands of many of today’s consumers, some board members asserted property address signs may be on their way to obsolescence.
But Trustee Ed Chart, who works as a delivery driver, pointed out today’s technology is not flawless. While he uses GPS technology, Chart said there are times when he has been misdirected to an address.
While there generally has been an effort in Rochester to bring uniformity between the former town and the consolidated village, several board members said this may be an area where exceptions should be made.
“I could see it in the rural areas, but I’m not sure about the (original) village,” Trustee Chris Johnson commented.
Board member Christopher Bennett, who was appointed acting Village President in place of Paul Beere at Monday’s meeting, said he believs the uniform address signs are not necessary. But Bennett said he would like a standard to be in place that takes into account the size of signage.
For the time being, the board is leaving the issue in the hands of the Ordinance Committee. Once the issue is hashed over within the appointed body, a final decision could be rendered by the village board.
Some background
Throughout the area, municipalities have adopted different ordinances concerning address signs.
The Town of Waterford, for example, makes uniform address signs available to all property owners. As part of the opt-in program, owners can purchase a sign for $40, and town staffers will install it at no charge.
“If you own a property that is hard to find or is unmarked, it may be in your best interest to pursue this option,” Waterford Town Chairman Tom Hincz notes on the town’s web site, explaining that the town police and Tichigan Fire and Rescue have had numerous occasions in which they were unable to find an address or property during an emergency call.
In contrast to the Town of Waterford opt-in plan, the Town of Norway does require uniform address signs throughout the municipality, including the more densely populated unincorporated community of Wind Lake.
-
-
-
-
-
I have a PO Box in Rochester. My physical address is 202 S Water St Rochester. GPS usually sends people to a similar address in Waterford. Mapquest does not acknowledge that 202 S Water Even exists. This could be a real problem if there was a health emergency. I think address signs would be a help but we have to be able to tie in the PO Box to a physical address!!!!
This is long overdue, IMO.
These help first responders find your home in an emergency, so it benefits not only the municipality, but its residents.
I commend Rochester officials for their foresight on this issue.
Dumb idea and past its time. GPS is more than adequate and even without it addresses are easy to find…for example the farther west you go in the Village the larger the numbers get…odd addresses are on the west and south sides of the street, even on the north and east.
I also live on s. water street and the addresses go in numerical order. The problem is the rochester, it does not come up on some gps systems. whether we have address signs or not will not help finding us on gps; that is a separate issue. beyond that Gps is fairly accurate and the police and fire department should know their neighbors well enough to find the street. we need less government telling us to pay for address sign. Personally I do not want to pay a dime for a street sign, if you want your address to be displayed, get an address plaque
I have an address sign…I think my beef is with UPS..they use the zip codes that the post office supplies and my address does not exist….I am solely known as a PO Box