Committee recommends Video Display Signs Overlay for Nashua Main Street, 4–1

The Planning & Economic Development Committee on Aug. 18 recommended final passage of Ordinance O-26-022, which would create a Video Display Signs Overlay District allowing electronic message center (EMC) video displays in a defined area along Main Street.

Supporters said the overlay would help cultural venues and downtown businesses promote events; opponents urged caution to protect historic buildings and guard against controversial content. Planning staff explained the broader overlay was crafted to avoid unconstitutional content-based restrictions on speech. "It was determined ... that by limiting signage of electronic manner to performing arts or entertainment venues only, we were performing essentially a conduct a contentbased regulation ... and that is inherently illegal under the first amendment and particularly the Reed versus Gilbert case," Community Development Director Matt Sullivan said.

The ordinance includes specific technical limits: the top of a video display sign would be no more than 35 feet above ground, and sign size defaults to existing wall‑sign rules (maximum 100 square feet in the cited downtown districts). Brennan Karen, chief operating officer of Spectacle Live, said the change would let the National Center for the Arts better highlight events on Main Street: "I'm the chief operating officer of Spectacle Live ... I'm here this evening in support of ordinance 26022," she told the committee.

Opposition centered on historic character and potential for controversial or political messages. Jim Pile, speaking for Main Street Methodist Church, asked that the ordinance account for older churches and architecture: "We have a very lovely architecture building right there on Main Street ... I just ask that the historical aspect of Main Street, including the older buildings, be considered." The ordinance explicitly bars signs that "obscure, cover or result in the removal of significant architectural features," listing cornices, transoms and lintels among protected elements.

The committee recorded a voice vote that was announced as 4–1 in favor; the recommendation moves O-26-022 to the full Board of Aldermen for further consideration in September. The Planning Board had earlier submitted an unfavorable recommendation (its motion was unfavorable), and staff placed the planning‑board referral on the record during the committee meeting.

What happens next: the ordinance will go to the full Board of Aldermen. If adopted, the city intends to apply existing wall‑sign standards and the overlay’s additional protections to limit visual impacts and traffic distraction.