Guest Column: Zoning Board Member Responds to Sign Column
Posted
Richard D. Keevan-
Mr. Gerard: In response to the questions and concerns made in your June 16, 2012, commentary concerning the new sign ordinance, I offer the following:
Comment: “I have a tough time understanding the level of minutia it contains.”
Answer: Your position is different from that stated by those who utilize the current sign ordinance to guide their signage decisions. The common complaint is the current ordinance is too vague and ambiguous. Greater clarity was requested. As you point out in your article, there are numerous signage categories and, sadly, clarity on all these categories requires space. Your concern about “understanding” the ordinance is a good one. Fortunately, in Warsaw, there is a simple solution. In the 23 years I have been privileged to serve on the Board of Zoning Appeals, which is involved with sign ordinance enforcement, I have never once witnessed our City Planner’s office not making themselves incredibly available and accommodating to any one who inquires.
Comment: “How in the world could this ever be enforced?”
Answer: There three common ways sign violations become known to the City Planner’s office:
1. Reports from surrounding residents and businesses (especially competitive ones) who feel affected by the signage and suspect a violation.
2. Reports from citizens who are concerned about the continued attractiveness of our fair city.
3. Observations made by the City Planner’s office as they travel about town carrying out their duties.
Comment: “And by who?”
Answer: The enforcement process typically works as follows:
1. The City Planner’s office may make a courtesy phone call to clarify and even resolve the matter. If not successful ...
2. The Planner’s office sends a First Notice of Violation to the concerned property owner outlining the problem and encouraging removal of the offending sign or contacting the Planner’s Office. If not successful ...
3. Step 2 is repeated. If not successful ...
4. The Planner’s office sends out a Notice of Hearing that states there will be a hearing before the Hearing Officer and provides a date. (Experience shows that people who have ignored the first three steps (sadly there are many) often perk up when this notice arrives. If not ...
5. The hearing occurs and a fine may be levied. (This was the case with the recent high profile auto lot incident. Although, it is my understanding the Planner’s office undertook many more steps than those above in order to try and resolve the matter amicably.)
Police officers have never been involved in the enforcement of the sign ordinance nor are there any plans to do so. Adding additional people to the City Planner’s office is also not an option.
Comment: “Who gets to decide what ... may mislead ... or confuse traffic?”
Answer: “There is nothing new under the sun.” Like our legal system there is a body of precedent out there that can be utilized to guide decisions. However, just like our legal system there is always some subjectivity involved.
Comment: “Some of the stuff just seems random or vague or arbitrary.”
Answer: Since I know nothing about the publishing business, I suppose I would say the same thing if I were to tour the Times-Union. However, I assure you it all has a purpose.
Comment: “ ... it’s the worst time to restrict businesses with convoluted regulations.”
Answer: The opposite argument could also be made. It is the perfect time to maintain a positive distinction for Warsaw from so many other towns and cities – an attractive town which minimizes sign pollution. Keep in mind the easy access people have to the Planner’s office in managing these “convoluted regulations” and that very few people object to the sign ordinance while many are grateful for the protection it provides from aggressive signage.
Comment: The “walking sign” ... “He was quite entertaining. He made me smile.”
Answer: The issue here is safety. When a driver’s eyes are not on the road but being entertained (for who knows how long) by sidewalk performers bad things tend to happen. (Think texting which I believe you have previously addressed.) Furthermore, you talk about this as if it were a one-an-out situation. If “walking signs” are effective, I guarantee you they will proliferate. Then a couple things will happen: 1. Walking signs will compete with one another by becoming more aggressive, i.e. leaning over the curb, walking out in the street along side cars etc. 2. Then citizens will complain that something must be done. The city will then shut down all “walking signs” and those who originally disobeyed the law will say “Oh well, it was a good run and I got my money out of the costume I bought, unlike those other suckers who obeyed the law and waited until the last minute.” The “suckers” who waded in only after thinking the city had de facto legalized the practice will be so angry it will be palpable. This is not a fiction, this is how it will end. I guarantee it. One final thought here, if it comes down to choosing between Warsaw or Indianapolis, with lax laws and/or enforcement (where I lived, near or in, the first 26 years of my life), I gladly choose Warsaw and by a wide margin.
In closing, “Knowledge is Power.”
Richard D. Keeven Warsaw, via e-mail
Editor’s Note: Exactly. Gary Gerard General Manager
