Council reviews draft sign‑ordinance changes after Planning & Zoning recommendation; staff to clean up language before final vote

City staff described proposed amendments to Chapter 42 of the city code that would revise temporary and portable sign rules for residential and non‑residential districts and create special provisions for undeveloped parcels larger than five acres.

Dawn, community development staff, told the council the proposal responds in part to problems that emerged during recent election seasons and large undeveloped parcels where existing rules limit property owners’ ability to post directional or development signs. Key elements in the draft include raising the maximum permitted temporary freestanding height in residential districts from six feet to seven feet, increasing allowed display time to 21 days per quarter, and a new formula for undeveloped properties that permits an unlimited number of 32‑square‑foot signs up to one 32‑square‑foot sign per 80 feet of lot frontage (signs may be grouped on a corner).

Staff said Planning and Zoning reviewed the draft and recommended approval, 6–0. Council members raised technical questions about internal inconsistencies in the draft (for example, differing references to a 6‑ or 7‑foot maximum in separate paragraphs and to number of allowable consecutive days) and asked staff to tighten the language before a final reading. One councilor asked staff to change the draft so that the 21‑day limit is a total number of days per quarter rather than allowing 14‑day blocks to be repeatedly re‑posted; staff agreed that “probably that would make more sense” and said they would clean up the text.

A citizen and a commissioner also suggested removing the term “off‑premises” from definitions to avoid ambiguity; staff acknowledged the comment and said they would revisit the definitions. Planning and Zoning’s recommendation and the staff presentation were placed on the council agenda; staff said a revised ordinance would be returned for formal adoption at a subsequent meeting.

What happened: Council received the staff presentation and public comments; P&Z recommended approval 6–0 but council asked staff to correct inconsistent language, tighten the rules on consecutive posting days and reconsider the terminology for “off‑premises” signs. No final ordinance vote was taken at this meeting.

Why it matters: The amendments would change how many and how tall temporary signs may be on undeveloped parcels and would change the allowed posting durations for political and other temporary signage; councils asked for clearer, consistent text before adoption.