Banners Banned in Hartsville
Holy Week is being celebrated at local churches in Hartsville to honor the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
As part of Wesley UMC's Maundy Thursday evening worship service, a drama depicting the Passover meal with Jesus and his disciples is being presented as a gift to the community- "The Last Supper", directed by Willard Jacobs.
As we have done since 1903, a few banners were hung to advertise the event. We have hung banners to promote Vacation Bible Schools, Food Fairs, Welcome Coker College Students, The Pumpkin Patch, Taste of Wesley, etc.
(one of two banners that has been deemed a violation of the city ordinance; this one is on the College Avenue side of the playground fence.)
(the second banner, seen from 4th Street across from the Coker College Library construction)
We had a phone call from the City of Hartsville that we needed to remove the banners. Today, Rodney Tucker from the City of Hartsville came down personally to explain the violation, and tell us again to remove them.
Apparently, these small banners are a violation of the B-1 District Sign Ordinance that prohibits banners. First Baptist Church is a different district, so their banners are safe. St. Bartholomew had to remove theirs, and apparently Bizzel's restaurant and others were also approached. West Hartsville Baptist Church on Carolina Avenue were also called, and they have to remove one of their two banners.
When asked by our church administrator why the sign at the Coker College Library construction site was not in violation, Mr. Tucker said that "That is temporary."
As these banners were just put up days ago and will be removed Thursday evening, I cannot think of a more "temporary" sign! In fact, most of our banners are only up for a week or less, with the exception of the month-long Pumpkin Patch.
We also asked him why we have never been approached on this "ordinance", and he said (this is a rough paraphrase) that "there has never been enough people on staff to enforce such ordinances. Now, there are four people on staff."
Am I alone in thinking this is about the silliest thing to "have to enforce"? Churches are non-profit, and contribute to Hartsville Interfaith Ministries, provide comfort and care to citizens, run soup kitchens and clothes closets.... in my humble opinion, this is one ordinance that can be amended to exclude churches.
Mr. Tucker and his co-workers at the City of Hartsville are just doing their jobs, and I hate to complain, but... have keyboard, will type.
One last "offensive banner" and I'll jump back down off my soap box.
Banners, not so bad
It is nice to keep our town clean. But there has to be a point where things are reasonable and not considered to be violating ordinances. Jiminy Cricket we are talking Jesus' Last Supper not selling crack to children.
What Next?
Thank you for bringing this to light, Jana.
This is among the most ridiculous things of which I have ever heard! It appears to me that that this "official" ought to be using every bit of his time by seeking ways to fill the myriad empty buildings in town, removing the abandoned cars strown about, or delving into the countless other city issues that need addressing, like attracting businesses and events to our area -- not attempting to keep folks from advertising worthwhile endeavors on banners.
Getting "Barney Fifey" about removing a banner announcing a church event on church property, or even asking a business like Bizzell's to remove a banner announcing something that brings people to the downtown, is a bit over the top. Bizzell's contributes a lot to the charm of downtown - a lot more than these city "officials" will ever do. This restaurant, and your church, has a right to post events that they have upcoming on banners on your property, if Coker College can do so. (I'd like to see them tell Sonoco to take their blood drive banners down when those go up.) Thank God you all have something to advertise that creates positive activity in town!
Jana, I'd put the banner back up, and I hope Bizzell's will too. Personally, I'd see that the mayor knew of this -- perhaps he'd like to comment. Call him! Seems to me adding employees to this person's department so that his staff can participate on this sign patrol -- please -- ought to be questioned. Sounds like a colossal waste of resources. We could use more police officers on the streets with those funds, I would think.
City personnel hounding church secretaries and small business owners over tastefully done banners, sets a new tone for slime. What an utter waste of time and city financial resources; I am more than surprised that no one got "tazered".
This is yet another example of how most in government (on all levels) can get out-of-touch with common sense / main street issues.
Explanation
Wow!
Well-said EVERYONE! Things never cease to amaze me. I will bite my tongue and remain a lady.
Where is the spokeswoman for city government when we need her?
Sign ordinance...
Jana,
I hear you about the sign ordinance! It is interesting... I spoke with a city official becaue Relay For Life usually places signs around town announcing the event. She was very kind and offered the explanation that the city doesn't want a million signs posted around town and how bad that would look in the city. She did offer a solution which is the city limits are tricky and places where you think are inside the city are really not so...check with the city and ask about different locations to post signs that are right outside city limits but are high traffic areas.
That certainly doesn't help churches much but I suppose it is an option. My question is where were city residents when this was voted on and who voted on this ordinance? I don't live inside city limits but I am curious as to how this passed without anyone really knowing about it and was there anything posted to make citizens aware of this new law?
It's about being a community that takes up the fight.
Banner Dilemma
I did a little research into the ordinance & found that the city ordinances are passed by the city council members. If you have a complaint, you can contact your city council member to request a change. You can attend city council monthly meetings to let your voice be heard. Also, there is a printable form available on the city website that can be printed, filled out & faxed back. The following permissable signage may be used in District B-1:
Sec. 7. Signs permitted in central business district B-1.
For each lot, tract, or parcel in the B-1 zone, one and one-half square feet of sign area shall be allowed for each one lineal foot of building frontage on the primary public street. In the case of buildings that front on more than one public street, sign area shall be based on the length of frontage of one side of the building only.
GRAPHIC LINK:Click here
Such sign area may be in the form of a single sign, or in a combination of signs located on one or more sides of the building. Additional signage shall be permitted for the rear of the building, computed on the ratio of one-half square foot of sign for each one lineal foot of building frontage. Permitted signs shall be subject to the following limitations:
a. Wall signs, provided that such signs do not exceed 20 percent of any exposed finished wall surface area and do not extend more than six inches beyond the building wall surface.
b. Freestanding signs. One freestanding sign not to exceed eight square feet shall be allowed. The maximum height shall be eight feet. For parcels on which more than one tenant is located, no more than one freestanding sign shall be permitted. Such sign shall be limited to 12 square feet in area and have a maximum height of eight feet.
c. Window signs. Provided that such signs take up no more than 25 percent of the glass upon which they are placed.
d. Projecting signs and signs attached to the bottom of a marquee or roof overhang, limited to one such sign per business. Maximum sign size is ten square feet. Such sign can not extend more than six feet from the building facade or closer than two feet from any curbline. The signage must have a minimum clearance height of eight feet from ground level and a maximum height of 12 feet above the ground. Such sign must be affixed by a solid metal frame.
e. Awning signs, provided that the bottom of such signs shall be at least eight feet above the sidewalk or grade at any point, and extend horizontally no closer than three feet from the curb.
f. Canopy signs, provided that the bottom of such canopies shall have a minimum clearance of at least ten feet, and shall extend horizontally no closer than three feet from the edge of the curb.
g. Internally-illuminated signs that lay flat on a building or window, provided that such sign bear only the name of the business located in the building, conform to the size restrictions, are non-translucent with only the lettering of the business name illuminated, and do not fall into any of the categories defined as prohibited in this section of the ordinance.
h. Portable sandwich board type special advertising event signs on the property being advertised, limited to eight square feet, provided that they are displayed no more than 60 days within any one calendar year, and for no more than 14 days in a row and that such signs do not fall into any of the categories defined as prohibited in this section.
If freestanding signs or sandwich boards are permissable, perhaps you can have a banner-sized sandwich board constructed, & place your banners on it at will.
In government, there is usually a loophole. I pasted all of the sign ordinance info that I found to a wordpad file; if you would like a copy, give me your email address.
Sign Discussion (Devil's Advocate if you will)
This is a great example of the value and use of this site as a communication tool. Sign ordinances are never totally popular but they do have their place and the people who helped get this sign ordinance in place were people who care very much about the ultimate image of the city. Banners are great for communicating and I probably rely on them to know what is happening but, face it, they can also be terribly tacky. And, they really get that way when people are not responsible enough to take their banners down after an event. Okay, we will never be a Hilton Head, but people accomplish a great deal there in the form of communicating what is happening without lots of waving banners, blinking lights, garish colors, etc. One thing about these type of ordinances, we usually think it is okay to control someone else's stuff but no one should mess with our stuff - because we are somewhat different and more tasteful than those other people. So, if something needs to change maybe some proposals can be made. Or, maybe some who feel strongly can join a couple of the long-term planning groups that are now in process/progress within Hartsville to update the long-range plan.
Can anyone here think of some of the towns and cities they have been through that have no real sign regulations at all? Is that what you want Hartsville to look like. While it is not inside a town and is another special case, and it is a very successful SC business, think South of the Border.
Build your community by being involved!
Points taken
Actually, I do agree with this; we are a lot prettier than other cities because if these ordinances. I just assumed that temporary signs were permissible, as they always had been, and was very surprised that First Baptist was zoned residential since it is across from a gas station, a furniture store, and a Sonic.....and gets more traffic than the quieter corner of 4th and College Avenue.
But, that is neither here nor there. We will get creative on the sandwich board signs which are permissible...just a whole lot more expensive and can't be left out without worrying about weather/water damage, vandals, etc.
Those banners are just so effective for so many reasons...I had hoped they would be fine for short term churches- not like we would be advertising $3 margaritas or anything of the sort!
THANK YOU to all that contributed to this issue- this site is becoming more and more a "public square", not unlike Richard Hardwood spoke of at Coker College last week! Get involved, get busy, help make the change you want to see in your community.
PLEASE, FOLKS!
If a person places a sign/banner that is tacky, out-of-line, on private property or "blue", then that is an entirely different matter. No one said a thing about the ones that were up at Bambino's for years, nor the ones Kimbrell's or the YMCA have plastered around week after week.
We are talking about a tastefully done banner that Wesley had on their church property about Easter events, and a banner that Bizzell's had on their property mentioning something about outdoor music, which generates much needed downtown revenue. The reason people like the Avants and the Gaineys are investing their money into city building renovation to encourage people to move into new apartments downtown, is because of what businesses like Bizzell's contribute to the area. Real estate agents are also hoping for the continued charm and success of places like Wesley Methodist in order to sell these apartments. A simple banner advertising positve concerns, done tastefully, is something city hall should be applauding. If things go out of business, etc., whom would want to move downtown?
Neither banner was "tacky", and the city offical was out-of-line in his approach to these various individuals. Government is supposed to be compassionate and caring when explaining matters to the citizens they WORK for and serve - I know - I was employed in this area for years. We have far too many burn outs working in civil and public service these days. This keeps getting proven.
Give me a break! Things can and should be taken on a case-by-case basis. One tasteful banner, not 40, was involved in the Wesley and Bizzell's case of which I am discussing on this post.
Jaywalking is against city ordinace, but no one does anything about that. So is spitting on the sidewalk. So is congregating en masse on the sidewalks, like the teens do in front of The Midnight Rooster on weekends. Where does it end? I could go on.
During RenoFest, Pepsi banners and signs were all over, and not just on the light posts. Sonoco puts blood drive banners up all of the time. People in city government should be able to discern what is warranted and what is not. This is not exactly chemical engineering we are discusssing, or OSHA law.
Ms. Longfellow exemplifies the type of courage citizens should applaud for taking a stand against such silliness. This is the equivalent of being fined or reprimanded for ripping the mattress tag off of a mattress.
Make Sure to Keep This Safe From the City Planner!
This is exactly, EXACTLY, my point: banners are weatherproof, light weight, and can stay up for meaningful activities all day, all night, all weekend without having to roll them in at night like a sandwich board.
Short term banners in B-1 (I'm not sure if Coker College is in B-1 or not) should be allowed to stay up under a special clause for temporary signs for things that are for charity or for a public service/gift to the community.
Double Click the thumbnail to get the effect of the large photo with the great banner
Our signs took great effort for Willard and Judy Jacobs to procure during an already busy schedule preparing for this wonderful drama. The artist that completed them, Miss Janice Morris, took her time to complete them after painting in her studio all day long. To purchase a screen printed banner for a one time event would have cost a lot of money, which defeats the purpose of a gift to the community from a very small church. Those banners on our fence do not attract a lot of attention, but are helpful in getting the word out there to folks that may not be from the area that won't be apt to read it our ads in our local paper, The Messenger..where is how Wesley spends their advertising money.
Whew! I am done with banners!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment