Solvang staff previews broad sign ordinance rewrite; committee debates A‑frames, banners and murals

City planning staff presented the first draft of a multi‑part rewrite of the city’s sign regulations (Title 11, Chapter 13) at the June 18 Design Review Committee meeting, proposing changes to make the code content neutral, streamline routine approvals and add objective standards for illumination and temporary signs.

Rafael, the staff presenter, said the rewrite is structured in two parts: Part 1 (this meeting) covers permit processing, temporary signs and limited‑duration signs; Part 2 will address permanent signage and nonconforming signs. Rafael said the ordinance changes respond to a March 13 workshop and the goal of clarifying rules for businesses while protecting Solvang’s village aesthetic.

Key elements in the draft and committee discussion included:

- Content neutrality: Staff said the draft avoids regulating sign messages and instead focuses on size, location and time, place and manner. Rafael described the legal rationale: content‑based sign rules face strict‑scrutiny court review, so the draft regulates physical attributes rather than speech.

- Permit tiers: The draft separates administrative sign permits (staff approval for low‑impact items such as temporary signs, minor change‑outs and relocation) from permit hearings before the DRC for larger or exception requests. Staff said the aim is to speed approvals that meet objective standards while retaining public review for departures.

- Temporary and limited‑duration signs: The draft defines limited‑duration signs (real‑estate‑style and civic signs) with size and time limits, and establishes rules for temporary signage. For A‑frame signs staff proposed: 1 per business, max 6 sq ft and positioned on private property within 5 feet of the primary entrance; materials suggestions included solid wood construction and daily removal by close of business. Committee members and staff discussed enforcement challenges and whether to require visible message changes over time to prevent static, laminated posters from proliferating.

- Banners and freestanding signs: Staff proposed limits on banner sizes and durations (city center stricter; larger allowances outside the village) and a cap on how often a business can display a banner per year. The committee asked staff to reduce maximum sizes and limit consecutive display days; staff agreed to refine the draft.

- Prohibited signs and illumination: The draft would ban digital/electronic and neon signage, certain illuminated awnings, inflatable and attention‑getting devices and off‑site billboards. Staff proposed adding objective illumination standards using foot‑candles to measure light falling on surfaces to address light pollution and impacts on adjacent residences.

- Murals and public art: Staff proposed exempting noncommercial art murals from permitting but committee members raised concerns about scale, placement and visual compatibility. The committee asked staff to move mural proposals to a “special consideration” category requiring DRC review with time, place and manner criteria; staff agreed to draft appropriate language to reduce risk of later legal challenges while preserving art opportunities.

- First Amendment boundaries: The committee’s attorney and staff reiterated that protecting free speech means the city cannot regulate message content on private signs; the attorney cited case law explaining limits on obscenity but noted ordinary political or profane speech is typically protected. The draft therefore focuses on neutral, physical regulations.

Next steps: Staff will post the draft Part 1 for public review, refine A‑frame, banner and mural language and return with Part 2 addressing permanent signage and nonconforming signs at a later meeting. There were no formal ordinance adoptions at the June 18 meeting; the item remains a draft under active revision.