Council rejects easement for Knox County memorial building sign after historic‑district, traffic concerns

City Council voted down Resolution 2025‑20, which would have authorized the safety service director to grant an easement to Knox County for a sign in the tree lawn in front of the Memorial Building.

What council considered: The county requested an easement so it could place a sign in the tree lawn immediately adjacent to the sidewalk and stairs that lead to the Memorial Building. City staff described a planned removable base — using a pinned post that can be removed for water‑line access — and said the sign location was chosen to avoid relocating two existing veteran memorials. City attorney Brorin and a staff presenter, Rob, summarized that the council would be granting only the easement (location and right to occupy the tree lawn), not approving the sign's final design. The historic review commission would have the final say on appearance and whether the sign could be lit.

Concerns raised: Council members and staff asked whether the sign would cross or obstruct the sidewalk, whether lighting would be run to the sign, whether it would interfere with sight lines for turning vehicles, and whether the location would complicate pedestrian flow at the Memorial Building's driveway and crosswalks. Staff said the historic review commission can reject a proposed design; if the commission disapproved, the county would need to place the sign elsewhere on Memorial Building property and might need to relocate one of the veteran memorials.

Other details noted in discussion: staff and the county engineer had coordinated on siting to avoid known underground utilities (a city waterline was called out). Staff pointed to an existing, long‑standing sign on East High near Snyder’s as a local precedent. Council also discussed prior and planned curb and crosswalk changes at the building to reduce vehicle‑pedestrian conflicts.

Council action: The motion to adopt Resolution 2025‑20 failed (vote recorded as failed 4–2). The measure would have only granted an easement; any sign design, including illumination, would have required historic review commission approval.

Next steps: With the easement denied, staff said the county will have to locate any new sign entirely on its Memorial Building property; that could require moving or altering existing veteran memorials. Staff encouraged the public to follow upcoming legislative packets for any revised proposals.