Committee reviews proposed ban on signs painted on inoperable vehicles and new outdoor‑lighting rules

City staff presented a proposed amendment July 14 to prohibit signage attached to inoperable or unlicensed vehicles and to adopt comprehensive outdoor‑lighting standards for Rocky Mount.

The proposal would add a prohibition on signs “attached to, painted on, or otherwise positioned on inoperable or unlicensed vehicles,” while exempting licensed, operable vehicles “actively used in the normal course of business” and vehicles stored in business loading or service areas. The stated purpose is to close a gap staff said operators have used to avoid the sign code.

On lighting, staff proposed new standards addressing glare and spill‑over, prohibiting flashing or intermittent lights and “high intensity beams,” and requiring new developments to submit lighting plans demonstrating compliance. Joseph said staff proposes an amortization period of 180 days from adoption for existing nonconforming lights and suggested encouraging (not mandating) that nonessential lighting be extinguished after 10 p.m. where practicable.

Council reaction: Some council members expressed caution about appearing to regulate content or specific messages displayed on vehicles. Councilor Blackwood and others asked about enforcement capacity and whether the problem is concentrated in a few locations; staff said complaints have come intermittently and cited several specific corridors and a truck frequently cited near the YMCA. The City Attorney reminded council that the U.S. Supreme Court has limited government authority to regulate signage based on content, so the ordinance focuses on size, placement and type rather than message.

Other related actions in the amendment: staff proposed clarifications for off‑street automobile parking as a special use permit in the R‑6 MFA district so standards are consistent across residential zones.

Outcome at the Committee of the Whole: council members signaled consensus to move forward with the outdoor‑lighting standards, but they asked for more internal discussion on the vehicle‑sign prohibition, enforcement protocols and thresholds (e.g., how to treat operable trailers or business vehicles). Staff said they would return with additional detail and noted enforcement would be handled by Development Services (code enforcement) alongside periodic inspections and the fire marshal.

Ending: The proposed changes aim to tighten the city’s control over nonpermitted advertising and intrusive lighting while respecting constitutional limits on content‑based regulation; staff will refine enforcement plans and return to council on vehicle signage before an ordinance is introduced.