07-12-07 Planning Comm. Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Meeting of June 14, 2007 Page 10 Subject: Dynamic Signs ordinance are recommendations directly from the International Sign Association, whose motto is"supporting, improving, and promoting the sign industry." 5. An exception for time and temperature signs is not legal because it is based on content. City staff has misread the law. Response: The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals specifically allowed an exception for time and temperature signs in La Tour v. City of Fayetteville, 442 F.3d. 1094, 1097 (8th Cir. 2006): "We agree with the district court that, because a message displaying the time and/or temperature is short and rudimentary, such a message poses less of a traffic hazard than other messages. In light of all of these reasons, we find the Ordinance to be content-neutral." 6. It is not valid to adopt the 20-minute hold time simply because another city did the same thing. Response: The reasons for the 20-minute duration time are explained. The fact that another city chose the same period after its own thorough study is support, but not the sole reason, for the result. 7. The Small Business Administration has found that sales increase with the use of dynamic signs. Response: Even if this is correct, it is not persuasive. Unlike the City, the SBA's goals are marketing and sales, not public safety. Aone-second duration is appropriate for an on-premise sign. Animations and video should be allowed in appropriate areas. Response: These suggestions are contrary to the findings of the legitimate safety studies. 9. Requiring the name of the business on the sign is also a prohibited content- based regulation. Response: The ordinance does not require the name of the business on the sign. The ordinance requires only that a permanent message be on the sign, which we presume will be some kind of an identifying message that will increase the likelihood that citizens can find a destination. The sign owner is free to decide what that message is. 10. The reference to the potential for distraction is not an appropriate basis for regulation. Other things can also be distractions. The studies have found no safety hazard. Response: The legitimate studies have found a correlation between dynamic signs and distractions. Those studies have also identified that distractions can io-