Public Art Study Group presents mural recommendations

The suggested text amendments to the zoning ordinance would remove murals from the definition section of Article VI, which addresses signs, and add murals under the general definitions found in Article II. In general, murals would be permitted by right on private property in the city if the Council adopts the committee's recommendations.

The committee proposes to define murals as "a graphic or work of art that is painted or drawn on an exterior wall and is a representation of a creative idea that is expressed in a form and manner as to primarily provide aesthetic enjoyment for the viewer rather than to convey a Commercial Message." 

Including potential limitations on murals in single-family neighborhoods was considered but ultimately rejected, according to Development Services Executive Director Scott Cummings, who gave the presentation to the Council. 

"When we started drilling into what we legally could and couldn't do related to the regulations to try to limit to different zones, it became more problematic, so our recommendation would be not to deal with that," he said. "If we permit murals, that would be allowed in the same context. We cannot regulate content. I may say that numerous times tonight, but that is a key component to what we can and cannot do related to regulation of murals. A lot of the neighborhoods will have covenants that would have restrictions as well to cover some of that."

Cummings also addressed what would be considered graffiti instead of a mural. 

"We did not add a definition of graffiti," said Cummings. "If someone has a piece of property and invites someone to paint something on the wall and paint their graffiti on the wall, then that's their expression, that's their art. If someone did not invite them and they painted on there, then it's vandalism and trespassing and they can prosecute."

In addition to removing murals from the city's definition of a sign, the committee also proposed revising the sign definition in Section 602 to read "any letters, works, numerals, figures, emblems, pictures, devices, designs, trade names, or marks or combinations thereof, excluding Murals, designed to inform or used for visual communications intended to attract the attention of the public and visible from the public right-of-way."

"Since we couldn't find one in our zoning ordinance, we'd recommend that we add a sign definition at this time," said Cummings. "Since we would propose removing the definition of mural as a sign is to strike murals as a prohibited sign. So it was pretty straightforward as far as what would change from what we have today and make murals permitted by right in the city. And in doing so, that would permit anyone that wanted to paint a mural, that they could make that investment. The only caveat is if it has a commercial message that's conveyed, then it has to be regulated by our sign ordinance."

Cummings also addressed what the city could do to enforce existing laws on the books as they pertain to murals, including using Inspection Services to enforce the Alabama Anti-Obscenity Enforcement Act or relying on the public nuisance laws in existing Alabama code. 

"We can deal with a mural in the same way we would deal with public nuisance today," he said. "To be a public nuisance, if it's something that's real busy that's attracting and distracting drivers on a busy road, busy intersection, causing accidents, that can become a public nuisance. One image I saw, it was a 3-D image painting of a tunnel and someone tried to drive through it once and found out it was a brick wall, so that could become a public nuisance."

The rejection of a variance request by the Board of Zoning Adjustment for a mural on the wall at Bedzzz Express on Opelika Road sparked a public outcry against the city's prohibition on murals and prompted the formation of the study committee. That mural will have to remain covered until the city removes the prohibition, according to City Manager Megan McGowen Crouch. 

"Technically, the mural has to go away," said Crouch. "Because this is being studied, our ask was ... the mural couldn't be visible. So instead of asking the property owner, while this was being studied, to paint over it, we requested that they just keep it covered."

The mural recommendations will now go to the Planning Commission, which will review them at its packet meeting in September before considering the changes at its Sept. 8 meeting. If the Commission provides a recommendation at that time, the Council would then consider the changes at its meeting on Oct. 18. 

Consideration of how the city would address public art will come at a later date, with the creation of a public art subcommittee during the Auburn 2040 process a likely possibility. No date has been set for the resumption of the Auburn 2040 process, which has been postponed multiple times due to the pandemic, according to Crouch.