Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Signs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning staff introduce revised sign ordinance to align code with court rulings, add graphics and clarify illumination rules
Summary
Planning and zoning staff introduced a revised sign ordinance for first reading, citing the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Reed v. Town of Gilbert and emphasizing updated definitions, graphics, illumination and temporary‑sign rules.
City planning and zoning staff presented a revised sign ordinance for first reading on June 16, saying the draft updates the city’s 2017 sign code to reflect legal developments and to clarify permit and safety standards.
Terry Maltane, planning and zoning manager, introduced consultant Jill Boehm of Difel and Webster, who described how the ordinance responds to the Reed v. Town of Gilbert case by avoiding content‑based rules and by treating temporary signage more uniformly. “If you have to read the sign to explain what kind of a sign it is, then you're probably regulating the content,” Boehm said, summarizing the court’s holding and the ordinance changes it prompted.
Boehm said the draft ordinance reorganizes the code to present definitions, permits, prohibitions and permitting procedures up front and adds many illustrations intended to make compliance easier. She said the draft addresses location, height, area and illumination standards and includes a table of sign types “so people can look at the kind of sign they're looking for and they can see what's required.” She also said the code aims to incentivize good design with sign bonuses and to provide clearer maintenance and removal standards for nonconforming signs.
Commissioners asked whether the draft addresses illumination and public‑right‑of‑way signs that might guide traffic. Boehm indicated two parts of the code address illumination and pointed commissioners to a table that ties size to measuring distance. On signs in the right of way or those that divert traffic, staff said such signs would be addressed differently because public‑right‑of‑way signage often falls under separate controls.
Why it matters: The ordinance would reshape how businesses and property owners obtain sign permits and how the city enforces sign safety and aesthetics. The draft is at first reading; staff said outreach and clear graphics are meant to reduce nonconformity over time. The commission did not vote to adopt the ordinance at this meeting; it was presented for a first reading and commissioners asked follow‑up questions.
