EDITORIAL: Consistency needed in city regulations – Tuscaloosa News

<p>Many local businesses continue to struggle, particularly those impacted by the April 27, 2011, tornado. Business owners are making tough decisions about their workforce, facilities and market conditions.</p><p>They need all they help they can get from local government, particularly as new building codes are developed. Businesses need a level playing field to compete and they need consistent rules and regulations.</p><p>We are glad to see Tuscaloosa city officials are listening to concerns by business owners about ordinances they believe make their work harder, but changing those rules also has consequences.</p><p>Take, for example, the current debate over the city’s sign ordinance. More than four years ago, Tuscaloosa created new rules for business signs after long discussion with business leaders. Since then, there has been little dispute about what is allowed and what isn’t.</p><p>Over that time, the city has issued more than 500 permits, according to Planning Director John McConnell. Those businesses have played by the rules.</p><p>Now those rules may be changing again.</p><p>Taco Casa wants to replace its large iconic cactus on 15th Street that was blown away by the storm. We’d like to see it back. It would be another sign of recovery, and restore a landmark for a local business.</p><p>But the sign is larger than the rules permit. The previous sign had been erected before December 2007, and so was grandfathered when the sign ordinance was re-written then.</p><p>Attorneys for Taco Casa have been talking to city planners about ways the sign ordinance might be changed to accommodate the big cactus. The city’s Public Projects Committee has approved some amendments that now go the full City Council.</p><p>The changes may be for the best. They simplify the code to remove the distinction between signs mounted on poles and “monument” signs that sit directly on the ground. The limit for surface area of signs would be consistent and so would the height limit. But what about those 500 or so business that invested in signs over the past four years? Would they have liked to design their signs under the amended rules? Will they be at a competitive disadvantage now?</p><p>The changes are not drastic, and would not seem to be a game changer for local businesses. But committee member and councilwoman Cynthia Almond correctly advised that watering down the ordinance further may undo the benefits it has provided. It also isn’t fair to keep changing regulations.</p><p>Signs limits are a good example of a regulation that can well only when consistently applied. If all businesses have smaller signs, clutter is reduced but every businesses has equal visibility. Without that, competitors have to erect ever-larger signs, brighter lights or other gimmicks to grab customers’ attention.</p><p>We need a regulations that allow businesses to thrive, communities to prosper and consistency to plan for the future.</p>