Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Branding Signage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council authorizes bid process for citywide wayfinding and gateway signage after debate; members vote to proceed
Summary
After a lengthy presentation by Guide Studio and council debate over scale, cost and number of signs, the council voted to authorize the bid process for a community signage program; members said they will pare scope and confirm sizes before awarding contracts.
WIXOM, Mich. — The Wixom City Council authorized staff to prepare a bidding package for a citywide wayfinding and gateway signage program after hearing a detailed presentation from Guide Studio and extensive council discussion about sign size, quantity and cost.
Assistant City Manager Drew Benson introduced Erica Deutsch of Guide Studio, who reviewed the consultant’s design and strategy: a system of gateways, vehicular directionals, trailheads, pedestrian kiosks and facility identification signs that use the city’s recently adopted branding. Deutsch said the scheme was developed with a steering committee and follows wayfinding best practices to place signs at decision points rather than “litter” the city with markers.
Council debate that followed focused on three topics: the total number of signs proposed (about 70 in the initial phase), the physical sizes of gateway and monument signs that staff and the consultant recommended, and the program’s budget. Benson and Guide Studio said the consultant’s cost estimate range for a full program typically runs $750,000 to $1.2 million; Benson added the estimate included a 15% contingency and that $200,000 of the program cost was expected from the DDA. Members asked staff to identify which signs would be replacements versus wholly new installations and requested clearer dimensional data so they could assess scale in context.
Some council members urged paring the program to primary and secondary gateway signs and a smaller set of downtown directionals; others favored proceeding with bids to obtain firm prices and then phasing implementation. Council member Sharp urged caution about adding signage that duplicates information people already get from vehicle or phone GPS, and several members said they would prefer staff to return with clearer size renderings and a breakdown of replacements versus new work.
During debate a motion to table consideration was offered and voted on; the motion failed. Council then moved to authorize staff to prepare the bid package for the full signage program as presented, with the understanding administrators would refine sizes, confirm which signs are replacements, and return with costs and recommendations before procurement or construction decisions are finalized. The final authorization passed (six yes, one no).
Benson told council staff will provide more detailed dimensions for existing signs and include context renderings when the bids are brought back. He also said bidding the broader package gives flexibility to phase the program and choose only those elements the city and DDA ultimately fund.
