|
Any success that the sign
industry has achieved during the past thirty years of battling restrictive
sign codes is being threatened by the publication of a new version of
Street Graphics and the Law. Initial review shows that Street
Graphics and the Law continues to advocate censorship of our customers'
constitutionally protected rights to free speech.
What
Are Street Graphics?
Graphics on bus shelters
and park benches? Flags on light poles? Is this just another word for
signage? Well yes, but it is much more than that. When sign industry veterans
refer to Street Graphics, they are referring to the book Street Graphics
and the Law, and the model sign ordinance contained in this book.
1971
Street Graphics and the Law published by the American
Planning Association. This publication was highly critical
of the sign industry and provided the planning community with
the instruction that signs serve no other purpose than identifying
a business and gave planners the right to control the content
of a sign’s message…a right that we now know is
unconstitutional. Sign manufacturers found themselves entrenched
in battles to secure permits for their customers.
2004
In October, Street Graphics and the Law was revised and
published by the American Planning Association. The message to planners
has not changed and continues to advocate the censorship of customers’
constitutionally protected right to free speech.
|
Where
Did Street Graphics and the Law Come From And Why Is The Sign
Industry Concerned?
In the late 1960s,
Planner William Ewald received funding to develop a sign code for
Baltimore County, Maryland. The efforts of Ewald and others, called
the “Baltimore
Study,” became the Street Graphics methodology. Under
the Street Graphics and the Law approach, signs were allowed
to contain no more than seven items of information. Of course, defining
what is an “item of information” is completely subjective.
Additionally, the code contained color limitations. When the
code was presented to Baltimore County, it was rejected and not adopted.
In 1971, with a grant
from the U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Street
Graphics and the Law was written by law professor Daniel Mandelker
and planner Ewald using the methodology of the “Baltimore
Study.”
The acknowledgment of HUD implied federal government endorsement. The
American Planning Association promoted and sold this book throughout
the country.
Street Graphics
and the Law and the infamous “Baltimore Study” completely
changed the environment of cooperation and service that had prevailed
in the sign industry. Instead of recognizing how the sign industry
served its customers and community by creating unique signs presenting
a community’s
diverse speech, the American streetscape was presented through the distorted
view of a telephoto lens. Signs were called “visual pollution”
and “litter-on-a-stick.”
Street Graphics
and the Law promoted censorship of our customers’ messages
by recommending limits on the number of syllables, shapes and colors
on a sign, based on “items of information.” Scientific
studies were manipulated to justify these recommendations. Small
sign sizes and height restrictions were recommended. Amortization
was proposed for removal of existing signs. Put simply, Street
Graphics and the Law is
the “grandfather” of modern restrictive sign ordinances.
The sign industry
didn’t sit still; we fought back and joined together in associations.
We collectively worked to raise public awareness about the fallacies
of this work.
The U.S. sign industry
discovered the study of on-premise signs that Dr. Robert James Claus had
been conducting in Canada. Drs. Claus were asked to aid the U.S. sign
industry. Publications were produced that exposed the false declarations
behind Street Graphics and the Law. In 1974, 1975 and 1976 Signs
of the Times published three books by Drs. Claus on visual communications,
which expanded a previous book Dr. Claus published in Canada in 1971.
Visual Communications (Volumes 1, 2 and 3) contain much of the
basic information now reappearing in newer traffic publications.
In 1976 with funding
from HUD, Dr. Claus prepared a book titled Signage: Planning Environmental
Visual Communication. This book repudiated Street Graphics
and the Law and the restrictive concepts it contained.
By the late ‘70s
the sign industry, with Dr. Claus’ help, was beginning to reverse
the effects of Street Graphics and the Law. Our local associations
were highly active. Street Graphics ordinances were overturned.
We were winning court cases based on the importance and economic
value of on-premise signs. The sign industry was hopeful that reasonableness
was returning to our world.
Before the philosophies
of this publication permeate our cities and municipalities, we need to
take a stand. If you encounter a community contemplating enactment of
an ordinance based on Street Graphics and the Law, we urge you
to call immediately ISA’s Government Relations Hotline (866) WHY-SIGNS
or e-mail signage.help@signs.org
and request assistance from our experts.
Note to Readers:
A number of Dr. Claus’ early publications will shortly be
available to the public at www.plannersresource.org.
Please bookmark this site and check back for updated information.
|
