Zoning Rewrite
Signs of Frustration Among Missoula City Council Members Over Zoning
Missoula City Council members skate around sign questions in zoning ordinance review.By Travis Koch, 8-05-09
The electronic sign on the historic Wilma Theatre in downtown Missoula. City council members voted to prohibit future installment of electronic signs in the downtown business district. Travis Koch photo.
Picture a dozen politicians skating aimlessly around a frozen pond. Occasionally two collide, possibly exchanging words, sometimes cordial, other times heated. The remainder of the session consists of repetitious questions, poorly framed proposals, demands for clarification and declarations of confusion, all in a tone of general exasperation because no one seems to be listening to anyone else.
Now you have an image of Missoula’s Plat, Annexation and Zoning (PAZ) committee meeting this morning.
After several hours of discussion and public comment on electronic, reader board-style signs – mostly a repetition of previous discussions and comments—the PAZ committee finally came to a few tentative conclusions: new electronic signs will not be banned (yet); animation on electronic signs will be prohibited (no dancing turkeys for now); the hours of operation for electronic signs will not be restricted (still); and new electronic signs will not be allowed in the downtown business district.
“I have a feeling we will revisit this issue someday soon,” said PAZ chairman Bob Jaffe after the votes were taken.
Halfway through the meeting—a model of inefficiency—the committee got back to where last week’s meeting began, eliciting visible frustration from Jaffe. “We’re spending too much time on motions that have no chance of passing,” he said. “I wish we could just get this over with and get on with the ordinance.”
“We have to get to a vote,” insisted Jaffe, growing impatient after hearing an hour of public comment on whether or not electronic signs are safety hazards.
Councilman John Hendrickson objected to the push.
“We’ve heard a lot of public comment and we have to get on with it,” continued Jaffe.
Councilman Jon Wilkins joined Hendrickson’s objection.
“We’ve spent three hours on nothing,” said Jaffe.
Audible gasps came from the audience, which consisted of about two dozen pro-sign business owners who had taken valuable time out of their day to come say “nothing” to the committee.
“What I mean,” backtracked Jaffe, “is would anybody like to say something that hasn’t already been expressed?”
A few more people commented.
“Have we exhausted public comment?” asked Jaffe.
Not yet.
The committee will continue to work through the proposed zoning ordinance update while they wait for district judge John Larson to decide on a pending lawsuit that could further delay the review process.
Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.
Comments
Add your comment below
Animated sign – means a sign depicting or involving action, motion, light, or color changes through electrical or mechanical means.
Level 1 Static Display Only. (messages changed with no transition)
Level 2 Static Display with “Fade” or “Dissolve” transitions, or similar subtle transitions and frame effects that do not have the appearance of moving text.
Level 3 Static Display with “Fade”, “Dissolve“, Travel”, or “Scrolling” transitions, or similar transitions and frame effects that have text or animated images that appear to move or change in size, or be revealed sequentially rather than all at once.
Level 4 Full Animation, Flashing and Video.
My suggestion is to restrict city signs to Level 1 or Level 2, and to restrict the dimension and light intensity of the sign.
Why is it ok for Jaffe and "his side" to get another chance for his public comment on the Broadway portion of the Downtown Master Plan? They are backing Broadway out and stalling unitil they can talk about it on and on and on ......... It's so inefficient.
When the Libs want it their way they will make the time for LOTS of community conversation.
And Marilyn, thanks for clarifying that there were only eight council members present at this week's meeting. I intended the opening metaphor to give a sense of the general tone of the last few meetings, not the specific attendance of any particular meeting.