Sign Ordinance: Here we go again
A rather heady fight over a new sign ordinance is brewing in the Columbia business community. The Special Business District, in an effort to distinguish itself as a unique environment within the city, has accomplished many good things. Most readily agree that the removal of the concrete pedestrian canopy is a welcome change. The removal sacrifices protection from inclement weather but opens up downtown and eliminates the bowling alley appearance. Raised planters, crosswalks paved with bricks, benches, and historic street signs are fine additions. In late 2006, thanks to the gracious and painstaking work of Deb Sheals, downtown Columbia was listed on the National Register of Historic Places. All of this has been a successful, collaborative effort of many people over the years.
We find ourselves now in the midst of a contorted effort to revise the current sign ordinance. It needs revision. Removal of the concrete canopy rendered some portions of the ordinance obsolete, and new marketing trends require greater flexibility. A myopic view by the SBD board however has isolated downtown in its own uniqueness and created unintended animosity. An SBD subcommittee and city staff began studying the current ordinance months ago.
However, deliberations did not include industry representatives, interested landlords or merchants with differing viewpoints. As such, a “group think” ordinance has been presented and is encountering much resistance. The SBD has the best of intentions, yet we all know which road is paved with those intentions.
Much of this could have been avoided with a deliberate, forthright effort to involve many parties at the onset. In my experience, signs are the single most emotional area of business. Discussion and revision of sign issues require a thick skin, unusually high levels of participation and a slow, thoughtful process. Any appearance of rapid change invites swift and certain redress. The SBD board has circled the wagons as the proposed revisions have come under attack. Their exhaustive propaganda campaign is now under way and seeks to trivialize opponents’ concerns. One board member has stated, “I can tell you right now that the SBD is not interested in making any more compromises at this point” while another stated he didn’t think that the opposition would have agreed to the ordinance even if the SBD had made every change as requested.
Too bad the SBD board has become so isolated and aloof. They view this simply as a matter for the Special Business District. However, for the Columbia City Council, even-handedness and fair play are significant matters. As an example, the allowance of projecting signs and temporary sandwich board signs is reasonable. Yet from the city council’s viewpoint, how can a business outside downtown be denied the same privileges?
The fundamental error of this process is the assumption that the sign ordinance revisions now being considered are relevant only to downtown.
Yes, we want a strong and vibrant downtown but as a part of a strong and vibrant community. Downtown does not belong to the SBD board. In reality, the community could survive without downtown—not a glamorous prospect but certainly a doable one. On the other hand, downtown relies not only on the entire remainder of the community but also on the outlying retail areas to draw large numbers of shoppers from mid-Missouri. Commerce is why people come to Columbia. The commerce may be medical or educational in nature. People may come for employment or retail opportunities. They may be drawn by recreational commerce.
Regardless of the reason any of us visit or live here, after this conflagration we still need each other and certainly do not want to scorch any bridges. The lines in the sand need to be raked out. The SBD board and their opposition need to sit opposite each other for as long it takes in order to present a palatable, revised sign ordinance to the city council.