Breakfast links: What to do

by Steven Yates • August 20, 2012 8:37 am

Photo by M.V. Jantzen on Flickr.

Everywhere the sign regulations: DC's new sign regulations include restrictions on signs on tour buses, vacant buildings, and billboards. Sidewalk signs would now also be subject to a permitting process. (WBJ)

But is it uphill both ways?: While Arlington wants more children walking to school, some parents are not happy that their children will have to walk instead of taking the bus. (Examiner)

Vote on this and that: Maryland voters will be voting on 7 ballot issues including high profile questions on gambling and same-sex marriage. Three of the issues are on the ballot as a result of voter petitions. (Washington Times)

Just crash at my place: A few DC residents have started renting their homes out to short-term visitors while their families go on vacation, though people thinking of doing it should make sure they get all the necessary permits and permissions. (UrbanTurf)

Convention, meet city: As Republicans get ready to hold their convention in Tampa, they will find a city that reflects many of their ideals for a city with low-density sprawl and little investment in infrastructure. (Salon)

More or less money?: Some unspent transportation earmark money has been freed up for states to use. While this means more money could be going to bike and pedestrian projects, some of that money was previously committed to such projects. (WashCycle)

And...: Americans are walking more but there's still much room for improvement. (Streetsblog) ... A lawsuit against the Alexandria Waterfront plan had been dismissed by the Circuit Court. (Patch) ... Is it better to rent or buy? (NYT)

Have a tip for the links? Submit it here.

24 comments

Tags: links

Steven Yates grew up in Indiana before moving to DC in 2002 to attend college at American University. He currently lives in Southwest DC.

Comments
Add a comment »

I understand the restrictions on billboards, but requiring a permit for a sidewalk sign is just ridiculous.

by Adam L on Aug 20, 2012 8:52 am • link • report

@Adam L:

I agree that a permit is a bit too much regulation, but I would be happy if they made a rule limiting sidewalk signs on narrow areas or something related to proportionality of the sign to the sidewalk. Some of these signs take up half the walking space, particularly in the Dupont and U Street areas.

by 7r3y3r on Aug 20, 2012 9:04 am • link • report

And I though strip clubs were more appropriate for the Rebublican party.

by charlie on Aug 20, 2012 9:09 am • link • report

@7r3y3r

There are already laws in place about blocking public space. This is a classic scenario where lax enforcement is the problem, not too few regulations.

by Adam L on Aug 20, 2012 9:23 am • link • report

Re: walking to school,

article contends that parents are more upset that they are unsure if they are now walkers or not and haven't been notified with school starting so soon. I get that.

Re: sign reg's

I agree that instead of a permit process for every sign there should be a size limit based on the width of the sidewalk/ROW and what not and anything larger than that would have to be permit approved. That way the law is clearer about what is and isn't allowed.

by drumz on Aug 20, 2012 9:24 am • link • report

A permit for a sidewalk sign? Seriously?

@7r3y3r
I would bet there is already existing regulation about blocking the sidewalk. But the DC Council doesn't have the will to think about existing regulations and their only tool is the legislative hammer.

by MLD on Aug 20, 2012 9:25 am • link • report

Re: convention in Tampa: The description is loaded with sanctimony and offensive.

by goldfish on Aug 20, 2012 9:29 am • link • report

geez, this city is hell for small businesses. and we wonder why the cost of living is so outrageous? customers are the ones who ultimately foot the bill for all these stupid fees and permits!

by MJ on Aug 20, 2012 9:34 am • link • report

And besides the light rail line and general acknowledgement towards wanting to be a more urban city what is the difference between Tampa and Charlotte? They both seem pretty similar.

Also it sucks that its becoming a partisan choice on whether you like cities or not.

by drumz on Aug 20, 2012 9:41 am • link • report

Existing sign regs already require approval (i.e. a permit) for sidewalk signs:

3107.7.8 Signs on public space. No structure or standard used as a sign, bulletin, or advertisement of any sort shall be built, placed, erected, hung, maintained, or left in or upon any street, avenue, alley, highway, footway, sidewalk, parking or other public space in the District of Columbia, unless specifically approved by the code fficial, including the use of directional signs as described in Section 3107.6.6, in accordance with provisions of this Section.

Many of the regulations in that linked article arleady exist in the current regs. The Jemal rule about advertising on vacant or blighted buildings is new.

by crin on Aug 20, 2012 9:47 am • link • report

@drumz
And besides the light rail line and general acknowledgement towards wanting to be a more urban city what is the difference between Tampa and Charlotte? They both seem pretty similar.

The fact that Charlotte has the mentality where they want to be more urban and are investing in transit is the difference and it is a big one. Charlotte is planning for the future.

by MLD on Aug 20, 2012 9:54 am • link • report

While I'm all for kids walking more, requiring a kindergartener or first grader to walk up to a mile to school seems a bit much.

by dcd on Aug 20, 2012 9:54 am • link • report

@MJ - $50/year to put an advertising sign in public space on the sidewalk seems reasonable to me, especially considering as a homeowner I'm required to obtain a $75 permit to plant hedges in the tree box adjoining my property and $75 to put steps or a fence in the public "parking" that's not even in the sidewalk.

by ah on Aug 20, 2012 9:55 am • link • report

Arlington is not impressed by DC's sign laws.

by selxic on Aug 20, 2012 10:17 am • link • report

It's been a couple years since I was last in Tampa, but Florida clubs are generally better than North Carolina.

by selxic on Aug 20, 2012 10:33 am • link • report

I acknowledge the grammatical errors in my last post...

I wish I could edit.

by selxic on Aug 20, 2012 10:40 am • link • report

In the "rent vs. buy" category, it seems like "Buy" would always be appropriate for someone who has the ability to make a $300k+ down payment. If only we all had that problem!

by Jacques on Aug 20, 2012 11:05 am • link • report

Can we enforce those sign laws in Adams Morgan? Please?

by andrew on Aug 20, 2012 12:02 pm • link • report

@Adam L, MLD, & crin:

Great. Anyone know who I can complain to about obnoxiously placed signs? After talking with the store owner/manager, I mean.

by 7r3y3r on Aug 20, 2012 4:52 pm • link • report

Don't kid yourself, if Tampa was offered to the Democrats they would have jumped all over it.

Besides, if you want to try and link urban policy with convention-city choice, how do you explain the Republicans in NYC in 2004? Or the Democrats in LA in 2000?

Convention site selection has nothing at all to do with urban policy.

by dcdriver on Aug 20, 2012 5:42 pm • link • report

Convention site selection has nothing at all to do with urban policy.

Who said it did? That wasn't really the point of the article.

by Alex B. on Aug 20, 2012 5:55 pm • link • report

I'm going to answer my own question in case someone else out there cares (@andrew?):

DDOT enforces the regulations with respect to sidewalk signs: http://newsroom.dc.gov/show.aspx/agency/ddot/section/2/release/16348.

You can notify DC311 online(http://311.dc.gov/) or through their handy-dandy mobile app which lets you add a picture and uses GPS.

by 7r3y3r on Aug 20, 2012 6:25 pm • link • report

A simple no-permit "the sidewalk must be X times the width of your sign and it must be placed as close as practicable to either edge of the sidewalk" regulation seems the way to go here. I like knowing what restaurants and bars have on special, but I agree that some signs are too large and placed in areas where they're a major tripping hazard.

by Ms. D on Aug 20, 2012 8:33 pm • link • report

The sign regulations aren't final, despite what the linked article seems to say. They have just been proposed in a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, available at: http://www.dcregs.dc.gov/Notice/DownLoad.aspx?NoticeID=3120895. There will be a period for public comments until October 16, and the rules may be amended as a result. Submit your views!

by Mike Sullivan on Aug 22, 2012 5:34 pm • link • report