Stuart FLA. rethinks allowing 2 signs

Thursday, June 07, 2007


STUART — For a couple of signs that don't exist, they've stirred up plenty of talk in the city.
Two proposed electronic billboards will be at the center of discussion again Monday, when city commissioners reconsider whether to allow the signs on two city parcels: one just north of the Roosevelt Bridge near Fork Road; the other near the intersection of Kanner Highway and Monterey Road.

Commissioners decided about a year ago to allow Lamar Advertising Co. to put up two of the electronic signs, which would measure about 378 square feet and flash a different message every eight seconds.
In April, commissioners agreed the signs could go on city land, but they decided to reconsider about two weeks later, when Commissioner Michael Mortell said he didn't know how vehemently Mayor Mary Hutchinson and Commissioner Carol Waxler opposed the location of the signs, particularly the one near the Roosevelt Bridge, which is considered by many to be a gateway to the city.
"I personally think the bridge is pretty neat," Waxler said. "For a bridge, it's a pretty nice piece of architecture, and I just don't like the idea of a big billboard there."
A handful of residents also have spoken out against the proposed sign near the bridge, as has Fred Matos, chief operating officer of the Crexent Business Center, which sits on the west side of U.S. 1 along Fork Road.
"If you get a digital sign, you'll take the visibility away from our building and take it straight to the sign," said Matos, who added that his company picked its site for the visibility. "It's a detriment to our business."
Lamar executive Jim Maskas said he was unaware of any businesses complaining about the proposed sign near the Roosevelt Bridge, though he would be "willing to listen" to any concerns.
During Monday's commission meeting, Maskas will show video footage of digital signs found elsewhere in the state, which hopefully will clear up misconceptions about the signs, said Maskas, vice president and general manager of Lamar Lakeland, the division that would erect the signs in Stuart.
"It's not anything like a Vegas 'Circus Circus' type thing," Maskas said. "There's no movement at all, other than when it changes messages."
According to City Attorney Paul Nicoletti, commissioners have three legal options regarding the signs: They can implement the agreement as is, seek a compromise or break the agreement, which would send the matter back to the city's code enforcement magistrate.
In the case of the third option, Lamar would have the right to sue only if the magistrate decided to amend the agreement and the company didn't want to do so, Nicoletti said.
City consultant Terry O'Neil said a compromise could call for Lamar to move the sign proposed for the base of the Roosevelt Bridge to another location farther north along U.S. 1. In exchange, the city could opt to allow the company to retain some of its existing 13 traditional billboards, which would have to be taken down under the current agreement.
The issue of electronic signs first came up after Lamar wrongfully repaired billboards damaged by the 2004 and 2005 hurricanes without the proper permits, Nicoletti said.
Lamar agreed to take down all 13 billboards in the city if commissioners allowed two electronic ones.
Maskas said his company is "not ruling anything out" in regards to a compromise, though he questioned criticism of putting a sign near the Roosevelt Bridge when "there are four boards there right now."
The digital displays, he said, would be more "aesthetically pleasing" than these older billboards made of wood.
Should commissioners balk at having a sign near the Roosevelt Bridge, Lamar already has applied for a permit to install an electronic sign just north of Wright Boulevard on the west side of U.S. 1.
Waxler said she would be willing to consider moving the site of the proposed sign away from the Roosevelt Bridge to a spot farther north "where it doesn't stand out as significantly." But she still has concerns about the second sign near the intersection of Monterey Road and Kanner Highway.
"I think that location is dangerous," Waxler said. "People are really going fast coming off the Palm City Bridge, and it's hard enough to know if you're in the right lane without a sign distracting you."
Mortell said he favors breaking the contract so the city can do away with the electronic signs altogether, even if it means allowing Lamar to keep up all its traditional billboards or risking a lawsuit.
Hutchinson, who joined Mortell and Waxler in voting to reconsider the matter, said moving the proposed Roosevelt Bridge sign wouldn't address her concerns about the second sign. Like Waxler, she thinks the sign would be dangerous in "one of the busiest intersections we have in the city."
Should the company and the city settle on a specific agreement, Lamar could have the digital signs installed within two to three months, Maskas said.
Monday's commission meet starts at 5:30 p.m. at city hall, 121 S.W. Flagler Ave.

Source : Palm Beach Post Staff Writer Rachel Simmonsen