Sean C. Morgan
The Sweet Home City Council reached consensus on several key issues on the proposed rewrite of the city’s sign ordinance, and will likely read a draft ordinance, less restrictive than previous proposals, at its next meeting.
After three readings at three different meetings, the council may vote on a proposed ordinance. If approved, the ordinance takes effect 30 days later.
Size
The proposed ordinance will increase the amount of signage permitted for many properties, while maintaining the minimum amount of permanent signage at 50 square feet for the smallest properties.
The ordinance will limit, for the first time, signs on properties where the business is more than 100 feet from the property line, while generally increasing overall limits for depth of property in addition to the existing 1 square foot of signage permitted for each linear foot of frontage.
Window coverage
Provisions to limit signs in windows have been dropped.
The proposal had been to limit coverage of windows to 60 percent.
Even though that is larger than other cities, said Councilor Greg Mahler, who manages Hoy’s Hardware store. “I still think it should be left out.”
Those signs drive business, Mahler said, and that’s the consensus he keeps hearing from people.
“What concerns me, if you take the signs out of Speedee Mart’s windows (an example discussed at the council’s previous meeting), it’s going to be less attractive than it is now,” said Councilor Ron Rodgers. Opening those windows up would expose a deli area and the backs of cigarette cases.
Temporary signs, clutter and abandoned signs
Regulation of temporary signs also has been removed from the proposal, including off-building temporary signs, such as those on the fence at Hilltop Market and at the Coffee Hut.
Temporary signs remain prohibited on public property, except for sandwich boards and flag pole signs in the downtown area.
Temporary signs also may be treated as a nuisance if they’ve been up for 60 days, said Carol Lewis, community development director. “If someone goes on a vacant lot and puts up a sign, if it’s there 60 days later, we’re going to say, “Hey, wait a minute, it’s become a permanent sign, and a permanent sign has a permitting process.”
The ordinance will not deal at all with temporary signs in windows, she said.
“One thing I’ve been struggling with is how we got here,” Rodgers said. “I guess there’s been complaints in the community about aesthetics.”
Clutter and abandoned signs are among those complaints and arguments from those in favor of more restrictive regulations. The council discussed the signs on a fence next to Hilltop earlier this month as an example of the clutter.
“Advertising is the key for the survival of any business,” Rodgers said. “We’re trying to force a more picturesque town. What damage are we doing to particular businesses?”
Councilor Scott McKee Jr. said he didn’t want to restrict such signs as those at Hilltop Market, he said. First, the city doesn’t enforce its ordinance now, and he didn’t see a point in creating an issue.
“I don’t think any of those signs look like any more clutter than Speedee Mart,” he said.
“I know it’s not intentional on anybody’s part, but I feel like we’re targeting one particular business,” Rodgers said.
The council reached a consensus to drop proposals to restrict off-building temporary signs.
A Home Town Drug sign remains on the now-closed pharmacy as an example of an abandoned sign.
The city cannot force the removal of a sign based on its content, though, said City Manager Craig Martin. It is a free speech issue, and courts have protected the right to post signs in previous cases involving their content.
Lewis said she often hears that the city doesn’t enforce its ordinances in response to McKee’s comment about enforcement, but usually the comment doesn’t tell what the city isn’t enforcing.
Sunset clause
The proposed ordinance will have no sunset clause, which means signs will need to comply with the ordinance as they are built. Existing signs that may not comply with the new ordinance do not need to be replaced.
There was no identified purpose for a sunset clause, Lewis said. Most signs are legal or already legal non-conforming now.
“It lets the businesses choose when they can afford or when they need more signage,” Lewis said.
Enforcement
Enforcement has been simplified, Lewis said. Previously, that section of the ordinance was about four pages long.
“You used to have police going out and taking down signs,” Lewis said. “It was old, and it was messy.”
Now it will be handled by the code enforcement officer like other code violations, Lewis said.
Consensus
“What I keep hearing is I think probably the direction we need to go is that – with the help of some of the committees in town, the Chamber of Commerce, the SHARE committee, possibly through education – the shop owners to some degree, with Bruce (Hobbs, chamber board president) talking to them, it would probably be a self-regulation type of thing,” Fentiman said.
“Honestly, I don’t know what the right balance is,” Hobbs told the council. “Talking to them is a good first step. Say, ‘Hey, it looks like junk. That sign’s been there for a year and a half.”
Chamber Manager Andrea Culy previously told the council that the chamber would start looking at putting on programs for business owners on effective use of signage.
Lewis said the process of reworking the ordinance has been a long one.
“The Planning Commission worked for two years on it,” Lewis said. The council saw it, and it wasn’t simple.
The Planning Commission worked through many issues, she said, but the council heard different issues as people stepped forward to testify.
For more information about the proposed sign ordinance, call the Planning Department office at (541) 367-8113.
The council meets next at 7:30 p.m. on Nov. 9.