Whitefish board considers sign exceptions
Whitefish turns its attention yet again to signs on Thursday for a public hearing over changes in city law to better accommodate historic or iconic signs.
The Whitefish City-County Planning Board will consider a city-generated proposal to amend the city sign code to provide added variance criteria for signs that are historic or have community significance.
The proposal comes on the heels of a recent City Council decision to grant Great Northern Brewing Co. a variance to erect a large Black Star beer sign and keep two neon beer signs that originally were part or the brewery’s decor when it opened in 1994.
The council agreed with several citizens who maintained the signs are part of the building’s architectural design and add a historic art element to downtown.
The city recently found itself in a conundrum over the Mrs. Spoonover’s ice-cream cone mural and lost a lawsuit over that sign when the court ruled the city lacked consistency in administering its sign laws.
In a another downtown sign issue, some council members were concerned about preserving the neon cloverleaf sign hanging over the front of Casey’s Bar. When the bar was sold earlier this year, there were questions about whether the sign would be lawful if it were removed during renovation of the historic building and then put back in place.
Now the city wants to make sure its sign laws address those kinds of signs.
The proposed amendment would add language allowing the council to grant exceptions for nonconforming signs that “are considered historic or are perceived as a community icon with established community significance.”
To be considered historic or iconic, a sign must either come with proof that it’s at least 40 years old and is either identified with the history of a product or is integrated into the architectural style of a building; or is recognized as a popular focal point of the area “by reason of its prominent location, long existence, retro appearance or unusual design.”
Another proposed amendment suggested by some council members would loosen restrictions for signs removed for maintenance or road construction by allowing for a seven-day temporary removal for sign repair or maintenance, or if the removal is part of road maintenance or construction.
The board meets at 6 p.m. on Thursday, May 19, at Whitefish City Hall.
Planning Director David Taylor said in his staff report that one negative result of the maintenance removal amendment is that by allowing major maintenance and reconstruction of a sign without consequence, it will take much longer for existing nonconforming signs to ever be brought into compliance.
“Signs that are considered unattractive or garish will likely remain indefinitely along with the interesting, historic signs that everyone wants to protect,” he said.
The planning staff is recommending not including the maintenance exemption in the amendment and instead allowing temporary removal only for road maintenance or construction.
The board meets at 6 p.m. on Thursday, May 19, at Whitefish City Hall.