A bill to allow LED signs at churches and community centers in residential neighborhoods appears headed for demise or at the least compromise.
At best the bill to allow Light Emitting Diode (LED) signs in Nashville's residential neighborhoods appears headed for a compromise that will seriously limit their implementation. At worst, Councilman Charlie Tygard's bill may be headed straight for legislative defeat.
The bill will be back up for discussion at Thursday's Planning Commission meeting. The first time the bill went through the Planning Commission last month, it passed on consent without any public comments.
Planning Commission member Stewart Clifton said that was a mistake. "We didn't ask enough questions," said Clifton, who requested the issue be addressed again at Thursday's meeting. "To be honest we dropped the ball. It's nobody's fault but the Commissions. We had letters and comments from those in the community."
Since then, Metro Council deferred the bill indefinitely after passing it on second reading. Additionally, Tygard held a public workshop on LED signs.
The response to the bill has been substantial with many Council members saying their constituents are against it. "To be honest, I haven't heard from a single person who is in favor of this bill," At-large Councilwoman Megan Barry said.
The bill would allow LED signs, like the ones often seen at pharmacies, to be used by churches and schools located on arterial or collector streets in residential neighborhoods. Opponents say the signs are eyesores and too distracting for neighborhoods. "My constituents are against it," District 18 Councilman Keith Durbin said. "We're talking about streets like Belmont Boulevard, Natchez Trace, substantial residential streets and they don't want these signs."
Tygard has said he's not interested in piece-mealing his bill to allow the LED signs on certain streets, but not others. But, even those who feel like the LED signs have merit have suggested a compromise is in order and one could be coming.
"I'm working on a set of amendments to address the issues raised at the workshop and via e-mail and phone calls," Tygard said, adding he thought the signs make sense on major arterial streets and in a case-by-case basis on collector streets in residential neighborhoods.
For instance, the Bellevue church that prompted the bill to come up for discussion is in a special situation where an LED might make sense. The Harpeth Heights Baptist Church has neighbors on either side in the form of Walgreens and a YMCA that use LED signs. But because the church is zoned residential, it was not allowed to get one.
To deal with special situations like the Harpeth Heights Baptist Church, the Planning Commission will consider a draft alternate ordinance that would allow groups to receive permission from the Board of Zoning Appeals to install the signs in special situations.
The group requesting the sign would have to do so at a public hearing where neighbors could voice their concerns. The size of the sign, the times it could be used and the frequency of the scrolling text would all be addressed by the alternate ordinance.
"My sense is that it is probably heading towards a compromise," Councilman Randy Foster said. "It is the best way to create public policy when there are different sides of the same issue."
If the Planning Commission at its Thursday meeting disapproves the bill, then the chances of it passing through Metro Council on third reading are not great. The bill would require 27 out of 40 votes to be approved.
"I think it would be very difficult to get 27 votes as the bill is written right now," Barry said, adding she thought the special exception clause was a good one.
