Changeable Signs Remain a Moving Target

A move to allow electronic signs with messages that could change every 10 minutes that died in a close Common Council vote likely will be revived, according to council members supportive of the signage trial.

Naysayers’ concerns were that allowing the changeable electronic signs during the proposed 90-day period could lead to a proliferation of such signs and negatively affect the aesthetics of the city. Those in favor noted the city could regulate where the signs could be erected during the permit process. The council voted 8-6 Tuesday against the 90-day trial.

Although the council nixed the 90-day trial proposal, the issue will resurface, said Ald. Linda Nikcevich. She said several concerns related to the signs had not yet been fully vetted at the committee level, and the issue will be taken up again by the Community Development Committee.

The CDC already has twice taken up the issue, the second time voting 4-3 in favor of sending the 90-day changeable signage trial proposal to the council for approval. In sending it on to the council, however, the CDC also committed to further discussion on the issue regardless of the outcome at the council level, said Nikcevich, who sits on the CDC and supports the trial period.

Ald. Craig Wilson agreed changeable signs did not pose a risk that the city’s business districts would emerge as brightly lit strips similar to Las Vegas.

But the idea of allowing electronic signs that could change every 10 minutes or even every few hours is “too drastic, even for 90 days,” according to Ald. Tim Hanson.

Several aldermen cited the Tower Optical sign at 2130 N. Mayfair Rd. as an example of what the city should avoid. The sign is brilliantly lit with bright colors and is “just gaudy,” Hanson said. “I don’t want to see Wauwatosa turn into that.”

“My biggest concern is that this opens a big can of worms,” said Ald. Brian Ewerdt. “I think it comes back to what we want Wauwatosa to be.”

Ewerdt said he understood business owners’ desire to use such signs to drum up business, and said he was “torn by business owners’ desire to do all they can to generate business.”

Allowing the signs, even for a 90-day period and even with a moratorium on new signs during the trial period, could open the floodgates to more, Ewerdt said. He urged the council to “err on the side of caution and keep it the way it is,” which is to allow signs to change once in a 24-hour period.

In addition to Nikcevich and Wilson, aldermen voting in favor of the 90-day trial period were Jaqueline Jay, Dennis McBride, Bobby Pantuso and Jeffrey Roznowski. Those opposed to the changeable signs, in addition to Ewerdt and Hanson, were Kathleen Causier, Jill Organ, Michael Walsh, Peter Donegan, Donald Birschel and Cheryl Berdan. Ald. Jason Wilke was absent.