bbachtung
11-14-2007, 01:22 PM
This one is the gift that keeps on giving . . . This is the third article written about Chris "BLS" Chandler's battle over Hastings, Minnesota's sign ordinance.
Planners delay fix to sign law
Keith Grauman
The Hastings Star-Gazette - 11/14/2007
The Hastings Planning Commission took up a change to the city’s sign ordinance Tuesday night, one that was brought on by a resident who recently challenged the legality of the law.
Also at the meeting, the commission approved a re-plat and site plan for Riverwood 10th addition for seven townhome units in two buildings. The commission tabled a change to the city’s adult uses ordinance at city staff’s request so they could research it further.
In August, when Hastings resident Chris Chandler put up a campaign sign supporting Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul, the city informed him it was in violation of a provision of the city’s sign law that said no campaign signs could go up more than 100 days before an election.
Chandler never questioned that he was in violation of the law, but it seemed contrary to the freedom of speech promised by the First Amendment, so he fought back. The city reviewed the law and decided that a change was warranted.
The key component to the draft presented to the Planning Commission Tuesday night was the removal of any regulation or differentiation of content. That’s where the old ordinance got into trouble, by regulating some forms of speech, like political speech, more strictly than others, like commercial speech. Posting a campaign sign in your yard is considered a form of political speech and a “for sale” sign is commercial speech.
The city is free to regulate things like the size of a sign and the materials it’s made of, City Attorney Dan Fluegel said. He researched the sign law and helped come up with the new draft.
A state law says “all noncommercial signs of any size may be posted in any number from August 1 in a state general election year until 10 days following the state general election.”
The new draft of the city’s sign law takes language directly out of the state statute. The key to understanding how the city and state laws work together are the words “in any number.”
From Aug. 1 until 10 days after a general election, people can have signs of any size and any number of signs on their property. Outside of those dates, the city ordinance limits people to 12 square feet of signage without a permit.
Associate Planner Kari Barker said the 12-square-foot provision was decided upon by looking at other cities’ sign laws and by the fact that real estate “for sale” signs are generally six square feet. If a sign is double-sided, it can only be six square feet in size, which would total 12 square feet.
The reason the city can regulate the size of a sign in spelled out in the ordinance.
“Signs can create traffic hazards, aesthetic concerns and detriments to property values, thereby threatening the public health, safety and welfare.”
The goal of the ordinance is not to regulate the message displayed on a sign, but the “number, location, size, type, illumination and other physical characteristics of signs within the city in order to promote public health, safety and welfare.”
Commission members had several concerns about the new ordinance, including the possibility of opening the city up to sign clutter. They noted home occupation permits for home businesses limit outdoor signs to two square feet and under the new ordinance, they would be allowed to jump up to 12 square feet.
Commission Member Greg Schmitt said when they were working on the home occupation ordinance, keeping signage relatively limited was a major concern for the city.
The commission also discussed changes to the electronic sign provision, specifically related to limiting flashing or video display signs.
The commission voted to table the change to the law so city staff could work on the commissioners’ concerns. It will come back before them at the Nov. 26 Planning Commission meeting.
As Chris Chandler sat in the council chambers listening to the commission discuss the new ordinance, he said his feelings were mixed. He understands where the city is coming from when it comes to limiting signs that could pose a public safety hazard, but still questions the proposed limitations.
“Part of my brain is going, ‘well, why can I only have 12 square feet (of signage)?” he said. “What constitutes a correct size brings up a lot of questions you never ask yourself,” Chandler added.
He plans on attending the Nov. 26 Planning Commission meeting when the sign code will come up again.
http://www.hastingsstargazette.com/articles/index.cfm?id=16388§ion=News
Planners delay fix to sign law
Keith Grauman
The Hastings Star-Gazette - 11/14/2007
The Hastings Planning Commission took up a change to the city’s sign ordinance Tuesday night, one that was brought on by a resident who recently challenged the legality of the law.
Also at the meeting, the commission approved a re-plat and site plan for Riverwood 10th addition for seven townhome units in two buildings. The commission tabled a change to the city’s adult uses ordinance at city staff’s request so they could research it further.
In August, when Hastings resident Chris Chandler put up a campaign sign supporting Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul, the city informed him it was in violation of a provision of the city’s sign law that said no campaign signs could go up more than 100 days before an election.
Chandler never questioned that he was in violation of the law, but it seemed contrary to the freedom of speech promised by the First Amendment, so he fought back. The city reviewed the law and decided that a change was warranted.
The key component to the draft presented to the Planning Commission Tuesday night was the removal of any regulation or differentiation of content. That’s where the old ordinance got into trouble, by regulating some forms of speech, like political speech, more strictly than others, like commercial speech. Posting a campaign sign in your yard is considered a form of political speech and a “for sale” sign is commercial speech.
The city is free to regulate things like the size of a sign and the materials it’s made of, City Attorney Dan Fluegel said. He researched the sign law and helped come up with the new draft.
A state law says “all noncommercial signs of any size may be posted in any number from August 1 in a state general election year until 10 days following the state general election.”
The new draft of the city’s sign law takes language directly out of the state statute. The key to understanding how the city and state laws work together are the words “in any number.”
From Aug. 1 until 10 days after a general election, people can have signs of any size and any number of signs on their property. Outside of those dates, the city ordinance limits people to 12 square feet of signage without a permit.
Associate Planner Kari Barker said the 12-square-foot provision was decided upon by looking at other cities’ sign laws and by the fact that real estate “for sale” signs are generally six square feet. If a sign is double-sided, it can only be six square feet in size, which would total 12 square feet.
The reason the city can regulate the size of a sign in spelled out in the ordinance.
“Signs can create traffic hazards, aesthetic concerns and detriments to property values, thereby threatening the public health, safety and welfare.”
The goal of the ordinance is not to regulate the message displayed on a sign, but the “number, location, size, type, illumination and other physical characteristics of signs within the city in order to promote public health, safety and welfare.”
Commission members had several concerns about the new ordinance, including the possibility of opening the city up to sign clutter. They noted home occupation permits for home businesses limit outdoor signs to two square feet and under the new ordinance, they would be allowed to jump up to 12 square feet.
Commission Member Greg Schmitt said when they were working on the home occupation ordinance, keeping signage relatively limited was a major concern for the city.
The commission also discussed changes to the electronic sign provision, specifically related to limiting flashing or video display signs.
The commission voted to table the change to the law so city staff could work on the commissioners’ concerns. It will come back before them at the Nov. 26 Planning Commission meeting.
As Chris Chandler sat in the council chambers listening to the commission discuss the new ordinance, he said his feelings were mixed. He understands where the city is coming from when it comes to limiting signs that could pose a public safety hazard, but still questions the proposed limitations.
“Part of my brain is going, ‘well, why can I only have 12 square feet (of signage)?” he said. “What constitutes a correct size brings up a lot of questions you never ask yourself,” Chandler added.
He plans on attending the Nov. 26 Planning Commission meeting when the sign code will come up again.
http://www.hastingsstargazette.com/articles/index.cfm?id=16388§ion=News