Concerns expressed about sign ordinance

NEW LONDON – Members of the public expressed concerns about the sign ordinance for businesses in the city of New London at the Aug. 27 New London Plan Committee meeting.

Matt Larsen, representing FML Discount Grocery, led off the public comments at the meeting. He addressed the commission about the positive aspects of the perforated vinyl that he had proposed and received approval to put on the grocery building. He said the vinyl would provide shade and reduce cooling costs.

“There is nothing in any of the ordinances saying that I can not put up some blinds and just cover everything,” Larsen said. “So, the argument of law enforcement or anybody needing to see into our building is just somebody throwing stuff at the wall and hoping something sticks. There is no ordinance saying that I even have to have windows on my commercial building.”

Felicia Larsen, also of FML Discount Grocery, addressed the commission about the city’s current ordinance regulations regarding window signs. She said she was looking for approval to move forward with the business’ window project which she believes the business had already received approval for.

“On July 28 our façade grant was approved, not once, but twice,” Felicia Larsen said. “…We received communication that our banner was approved and we did not need a window permit for the window vinyl.”

She said the window vinyl is placed on the outside of the window, so EMTs or firefighters could rip it off the windows if needed.

On July 29, Felicia Larsen said Austin Dyb, director of Community Development for the city of New London, contacted the business with additional questions about the project, which Felicia Larsen said were answered on July 30.

“There was no response to that,” Felicia Larsen said.

On August 5th, believing that everything was good to go because they had everything in writing, Felicia Larsen said they paid a sign company to install the vinyl.

“Then on August 7th, after we had paid, we were told we could not move forward with it,” Felicia Larsen said. “We didn’t install the windows first and ask permission later. We asked questions, sought approval, obtained our landlord’s permission, worked through the grant and permit process, and answered the city’s questions, and then spent the money.”

She asked the commission to consider if the city ordinance is being applied throughout the city, as there are numerous businesses in the city that have substantial window coverage.

“We’re not asking for those businesses to be cited or forced to change their storefronts,” Felicia Larsen said. “We brought them forward for one reason, to demonstrate why we believe our project was feasible, and why consistent application of the ordinance matters.”

Felicia Larsen asked the commission to review the documents that she provided regarding the window project.

“Based on everything we were told before August 5th, what reasonable step did we fail before spending the money?” she asked.

Katie Bauer, the owner of the building that FML Discount Grocery is housed in, told the commission, “We don’t technically have to have a window on a commercial building.” She said she found four commercial buildings in the city that do not have windows. They only have a door, with most of the doors covered.

The ordinance should be refreshed, Bauer said.

Krystal Sattler addressed the commission about working with business owners to keep them in the city. She recommended the city review the ordinance.

Jill Lackore, an attorney at Werner, Johnson and Hendrickson in New London, told the commission, “We are a small town, and we need to support each other.”

She added, “We don’t want to chase small businesses out of our town, we want to welcome them and try to make it easier for people to come here. For people to open businesses.”

Steve Kent also spoke to the commission about supporting local businesses.

“I think we need to look at making rules and legislation and what have you, looking toward the future,” Kent said.

Ordinance explanation

After members of the public spoke, Dyb told the commission that there are some benefits to the perforated vinyl technology. He added that the city adopted a new zoning code in February 2026.

“That zoning code ratified much of our previous zoning code, added some verifying language, added in some more criteria associated with that, and basically set forth baselines for zoning within the city,” Dyb said.

Dyb said the zoning code is a “living document,” meaning it can be amended, interpreted, and changed over time. 

“So, discussions like tonight are important because we always have the opportunity to change the ordinance,” Dyb said.

Because the city’s current ordinance does not specifically list perforated vinyl, Dyb said the city must “make an interpretation of that use and find the closest listed use in the ordinance.” He added that he thought a discussion regarding the vinyl at a Plan Commission meeting would be required.

“But I had to make an interpretation at that time, and the closest interpretation that I could make to the zoning ordinance was finding that this would be considered a window sign,” Dyb said.

Dyb said a window sign has criteria in the ordinance and does not require a permit, but there are maximum coverage standards that must be followed. The ordinance specifies that there is a 20% window area coverage limit, as well as a 20% window coverage per façade.

“With these new technologies that we may see, perforated vinyl, other things that may come along, we have opportunities to evaluate and adapt to growing trends that we see in the community,” Dyb said.

After reviewing the pros and cons of perforated vinyl, as well as the challenges that it poses for the city, Dyb said, “I think it’s important to acknowledge this technology and material is out there in the community already, and what we want to do for those businesses that already have them.”

Dyb provided the commission with potential options for changing the ordinance. He said the steps to change the ordinance would require a public hearing, at which point the commission could recommend changing the ordinance.

Commission discussion

During the discussion, members of the commission discussed potential changes to the city’s sign ordinance.

At the end of the discussion, Ald. David Dorsey asked the public to allow the city to have a meeting to discuss matters before taking to social media with complaints.

“We don’t need to slam the city of New London on Facebook. We don’t need to say it’s unfair. We don’t need to do all this stuff,” Dorsey said. “We are reasonable people. The first I heard of this, I said, ‘This is dumb.’ Obviously, with a brand-new ordinance and brand-new book, we’re going to have issues like this come up. I just ask that you allow us to have a meeting, and if it doesn’t go your way after the meeting, have at it. But just let us have a meeting first. As you can see, we’re all pretty much in agreement that this is dumb.”

Ald. BaLynda Croy said the process takes time. 

The commission is scheduled to continue to discuss proposed sign ordinance amendments at its Sept. 24 meeting.