I suppose many of you are wondering what is going on at city hall with the “sign ordinance.” I really wanted to talk about the new paving and bicycle lanes on Smith Street, but evidently there is some discussion needed about the city updating its sign ordinance.
First of all, as just mentioned, we have an old, outdated sign ordinance that has been on the books for many years. It has been suggested that this is new and we are trying to create unnecessary restrictions on the business community of our city. I just talked with the staff at Indiana Association of Cities and Towns to verify a hunch and they are certain there is not a city in Indiana that does not have a sign ordinance as a part of its zoning ordinance (there are probably a few small towns that don’t).
Recently, our family was in Myrtle Beach for our annual vacation. You talk about “signs, signs, everywhere a sign”. It seems like on the “Grand Strand” there is no restriction on size, color, shape, frequency or style. Heck, there was even a guy in a gold, faceless spandex outfit out on the curbstone exhorting the busy vacationing traffic to pull in and sell their gold! (More about the gold guy later). The majority must feel that little or no restrictions on signage are important for commerce and tourism. It has become the community standard in Myrtle Beach.
A few hundred miles south on that same stretch of vacation destination beach is Hilton Head. I’ve been told that their sign ordinance is so restrictive that finding a drug store or grocery is almost impossible. Their minimalist philosophy of signage is what they feel represents their community standard.
Which brings us back home. As I mentioned above, our current sign ordinance is vague and ineffective. We are trying to simplify the current ordinance. We have actually made the policy less restrictive than the current by incorporating suggestions that were given at our first two public meetings of the Plan Commission. It is a very daunting task to simplify a sign ordinance. Every example is different. Other than logo signs, I have never seen a sign with the same size, color, location or material. In addition, each zoning designation must also be considered separately.
Recently in Goshen, they had trouble with itinerant merchants coming into the city; one in particular was dressed as a “gold guy”. That human sign interfered with sidewalk and street traffic, did not have a specific business location, and was doing business like a gypsy. Their council had no problem placing restrictions on human signs.
I certainly don’t want to awaken from a dream where Wally the Penguin, the KFC Chicken or Ronald McDonald is pummeling me because they had to hang up their suits. I don’t want blow up Godzilla or the Cardinal Center Duck to smother my family. I also don’t want to take the call when dozens of bikini clad models become human signs.
Do you think we should set our community standard and move on? There will be a third public meeting on the sign ordinance Monday at 7 p.m. I very much appreciate those who have taken their time to inform themselves of the issue, attend our work sessions and engage in the discussion. We will take as much time as we need to develop a solution that represents a community standard. To that end, we need community input.
