Opa-locka staff propose easier, cheaper sign options and grandfathering process; business owners cite two‑year permit delays

City of Opa-locka staff outlined proposed changes to the city sign code at a public workshop, proposing measures that would legalize some existing pole signs through a formal grandfathering process, expand permitted sign materials and increase allowable window signage while adding maintenance requirements. Business owners and property owners who attended raised concerns about permit delays, cost and uneven enforcement.

The proposals presented by city staff include a formal process to allow existing nonconforming pole signs to remain in place (subject to documentation and maintenance), explicit permission to use vinyl and metal composite materials for wall signs, an option to illuminate signs with external fixtures rather than internal lit boxes, and increases in some size and coverage limits. "What we're proposing, for consideration is the allowance of nonconforming poll signage and to provide a process for continuance," said Mr. Lee, a city staff member leading the presentation.

Why this matters: Commissioners and staff said the changes aim to balance a cleaner, consistent public appearance with lower costs for small businesses. Owners said the current rules can price small firms out of visible signage and that permit timelines are hindering commerce. "This ordinance is killing businesses in Opelika," said Alexander Bilbao, owner of Ace Hardware of Opelika, during his presentation urging more flexible, affordable rules (paraphrased; quote preserved in transcript used by article). City staff responded that legislation is being drafted to legalize some existing pole signs and to add maintenance and permitting clarity.

Key proposed code changes - Pole (pole/poll) signs: staff proposed a process to "grandfather" existing pole signs where documentation of prior installation exists; maintenance and safety standards would apply. City staff said draft legislation would allow some existing pole signs to be legalized if owners can show prior existence and meet upkeep and safety requirements. - Materials and mounting: the code would explicitly allow vinyl and metal composite panels for wall signage when mounted rather than painted directly on building façades. Mr. Lee showed a small sample and described the option as a lower‑cost alternative to illuminated box signs. - Illumination options: staff suggested allowing externally mounted fixtures that shine on signs instead of requiring internally illuminated box signs, a measure intended to reduce installation and electrical costs. - Window and secondary signage: the presentation proposed increasing the allowable window‑sign coverage from 20% to 40% of glazed area, and — for businesses with little glass — to allow 40% of wall area to be used for secondary information (hours, specials, contact info). The presenter noted the change would still require permits and standards review. - Monument signs and dimensional limits: staff contrasted past pole signs with monument signs and said the sign code would keep size limits (for example, monument sign heights discussed around a 15‑foot maximum rather than 30 feet) and require landscaping around freestanding signs. - Address lettering and maintenance: staff proposed a 12‑inch minimum for address lettering in commercial, industrial and mixed‑use districts and added a proposed sign‑maintenance requirement so aging, deteriorated signage must be repaired or replaced. - Permitting and enforcement: staff advised that any new permanent sign must have an approved permit and that existing pole signs that do not apply through the continuance process would need removal.

Business‑owner and property‑owner comments Several business owners detailed the practical impacts of the existing code and permit process. Alexander Bilbao, owner of Ace Hardware of Opelika, presented photos of storefronts on Opelika Boulevard and Alibaba Street (as shown to the commission) and argued the code’s requirements and permit costs have left many businesses without visible signs. He told the commission that vinyl options would be more affordable than illuminated signs and that many storefronts now appear underused or empty.

Property owner Mark Cooper asked that any sign requirement run in parallel with occupational licensing but not be made contingent on it, citing tenant turnover and delays that create enforcement friction. "If you throw in a sign requirement, it's gonna be another problem in the process," Cooper said.

Noel Espinosa, owner of Noel Muffler Shop, and Edwin Gonzales, a local sign‑shop owner, described multi‑year permit delays. Espinosa said the shop’s sign has been covered since the building was repainted and that he and the landlord have not resolved the replacement. Gonzales provided cost examples: a 4×8 vinyl panel can cost about $350 while an illuminated sign installation can run thousands of dollars, and he said he had prepared artwork for a client whose permit process has taken roughly two years. "How am I gonna make money waiting 2 years for a permit?" Espinosa asked.

Staff follow‑up and next steps City staff acknowledged irregularities in recordkeeping and enforcement and promised follow‑up. A city staff member said they would check permitting records for the two‑year case and expected to have an answer by the next business day or by Monday. Another staff speaker said draft legislation already being prepared includes provisions to legalize existing pole signs when documentation exists and to require maintenance and safety upgrades in some cases.

No formal motions or votes were taken at the workshop; staff said the comments will inform ordinance language to be returned to the commission for formal consideration. The presenters and commissioners indicated further meetings and revised draft language will be brought back to address grandfathering criteria, maintenance rules and permit process timing.

Speakers at the workshop included city commissioners and multiple business and property owners who urged changes to reduce cost and delay. Commissioners asked staff to review permit records and bring clearer, less costly sign‑permit options for small businesses.

The city’s planning and code staff will continue drafting the ordinance amendments and review individual pending permit cases; no adoption date was announced at the workshop.