Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board adopts planning commission recommendation on US‑95 visual corridor after public debate
Summary
After a lengthy public hearing with competing views from billboard companies and conservation groups, the Board adopted the planning commission’s recommendation to designate US‑95 as a visual corridor beginning at County Third Street north to the county boundary.
The Yuma County Board of Supervisors voted to adopt a minor amendment (case 25‑06) designating US‑95 as a visual corridor from County Third Street to the northern county boundary, following a planning commission recommendation and a contentious hearing focused on billboards and scenic protection.
Senior Planner Javier Barraza outlined two options: (1) restore the corridor to its original extent (Avenue 3E to the northern boundary), which the staff noted had been the historic default, or (2) accept the planning commission’s modified corridor beginning at County Third Street. "Those are nonconforming signs on the original plan; they are allowed to be there but changes could require variance or compliance," Barraza explained while describing nonconforming signage rules and variance mechanisms.
Brandy Wright, representing an outdoor‑advertising firm, urged the board to adopt the planning commission recommendation so existing billboards could be maintained and repaired without being driven into nonconformity: "If it stays to its original extent now and all my boards become nonconforming, that starts eliminating billboards for us," she said. Conservation interests, represented by Gary Meister of the Yuma Audubon Society, urged restoring the original corridor to protect farmland, wildlife and scenic values, telling the board, "We don't need more billboards in this area."
Board members discussed lighting, spacing and state (ADOT) requirements, the potential effect on agricultural operations and what ‘‘nonconforming’’ would mean for existing signs. In debate the board agreed to adopt the planning commission’s recommendation (corridor from County Third north); a motion to adopt that recommendation passed by voice vote.
What’s next: Staff said nonconforming signs may be maintained within county rules, but changes exceeding allowed limits would require variances and state permits where applicable. The board directed staff to continue coordination with ADOT and affected stakeholders.
