MONROE - Sign, sign, everywhere a sign...
The City of Monroe Historical Preservation Commission is trying to keep the downtown area uncluttered of signs, using the guidelines it set about four years ago. But on Tuesday, members of the commission found out they don't have the right to control some aspects of signs - namely, content.
City Attorney Rex Ewald informed the commissioners that their set of guidelines, adopted by the Common Council in August 2008, has a couple of constitutional sticking points when it comes to controlling signs.
"There's a potential problem with respect to (sign) content," Ewald said. "A problem could arise if it translates to an actual decision."
The commission has not taken action against any business owner for the message of a sign, but Ewald is looking to stave off any legal actions that might come in response to the commission acting to uphold its guidelines.
In Section 12 of the historic preservation plan, signs containing "statements, words or pictures of an obscene, indecent or immoral character, such as those that will offend public morals or decency" are among those listed as "generally not appropriate."
For a sign to be eligible for a certificate of appropriateness, owners present their ideas, usually in written and artistic forms, to the commission. For an "inappropriate sign," business owners must show that "due to the particular design, placement or configuration the public safety and historic character of the District will not be adversely affected..."
Ewald said the city can control the "time, place and manner" a sign is erected, but it can't regulate the message, regardless of how inappropriate members of the commission or community may feel it is.
The commission voted to direct Ewald to change the guidelines to reflect what is constitutionally permissible.
Members then turned their attention to problems the city building inspector, Dave Powers, said he is having determining sign size and enforcement. He asked on what basis the 20 percent limit is to be calculated.
Powers said he has received complaints about some stores' temporary signage also. The guidelines call for temporary window signs to be exempt from certification.
Ewald pointed out that the guidelines explain the meaning of temporary as meeting a limited time period and relevant to specific events, such as sales or community functions.
Such signs include "posters and advertisements for on-premises activities or sales, and community educational, cultural or entertainment events." The guidelines restrict temporary signs to be displayed for periods of not more than 30 consecutive days and not cover more than 20 percent of the window.
Some commissioners noted the need to keep signage from blocking out the scenery, both into the business and out onto the street.
Ewald suggested the time limit for temporary signs could be included in the city zoning codes for enforcement, and the commissioners took that route, extending the time limit to 90 days, to accommodate seasonal signs.
But they decided the 20 percent size rule needed to be defined more distinctly for certificates of appropriateness and agreed to take up the issue at a later date.
Grandfathered in to the plan are some backlit signs, normally not appropriate if erected after 2009. But the commissioners agreed a sign already in use can remain as an approved non-conforming use, even if it is modified to reflect a business's new name.
The Historic Preservation Plan for Monroe's downtown historic district had included restated signage guidelines in February 2009 and was reprinted with revision in August 2010.
The City of Monroe Historical Preservation Commission is trying to keep the downtown area uncluttered of signs, using the guidelines it set about four years ago. But on Tuesday, members of the commission found out they don't have the right to control some aspects of signs - namely, content.
City Attorney Rex Ewald informed the commissioners that their set of guidelines, adopted by the Common Council in August 2008, has a couple of constitutional sticking points when it comes to controlling signs.
"There's a potential problem with respect to (sign) content," Ewald said. "A problem could arise if it translates to an actual decision."
The commission has not taken action against any business owner for the message of a sign, but Ewald is looking to stave off any legal actions that might come in response to the commission acting to uphold its guidelines.
In Section 12 of the historic preservation plan, signs containing "statements, words or pictures of an obscene, indecent or immoral character, such as those that will offend public morals or decency" are among those listed as "generally not appropriate."
For a sign to be eligible for a certificate of appropriateness, owners present their ideas, usually in written and artistic forms, to the commission. For an "inappropriate sign," business owners must show that "due to the particular design, placement or configuration the public safety and historic character of the District will not be adversely affected..."
Ewald said the city can control the "time, place and manner" a sign is erected, but it can't regulate the message, regardless of how inappropriate members of the commission or community may feel it is.
The commission voted to direct Ewald to change the guidelines to reflect what is constitutionally permissible.
Members then turned their attention to problems the city building inspector, Dave Powers, said he is having determining sign size and enforcement. He asked on what basis the 20 percent limit is to be calculated.
Powers said he has received complaints about some stores' temporary signage also. The guidelines call for temporary window signs to be exempt from certification.
Ewald pointed out that the guidelines explain the meaning of temporary as meeting a limited time period and relevant to specific events, such as sales or community functions.
Such signs include "posters and advertisements for on-premises activities or sales, and community educational, cultural or entertainment events." The guidelines restrict temporary signs to be displayed for periods of not more than 30 consecutive days and not cover more than 20 percent of the window.
Some commissioners noted the need to keep signage from blocking out the scenery, both into the business and out onto the street.
Ewald suggested the time limit for temporary signs could be included in the city zoning codes for enforcement, and the commissioners took that route, extending the time limit to 90 days, to accommodate seasonal signs.
But they decided the 20 percent size rule needed to be defined more distinctly for certificates of appropriateness and agreed to take up the issue at a later date.
Grandfathered in to the plan are some backlit signs, normally not appropriate if erected after 2009. But the commissioners agreed a sign already in use can remain as an approved non-conforming use, even if it is modified to reflect a business's new name.
The Historic Preservation Plan for Monroe's downtown historic district had included restated signage guidelines in February 2009 and was reprinted with revision in August 2010.