Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Overlay Signage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Newport council advances zoning overlay to address off-premise sign lawsuit
Summary
The City Council approved first reading of ordinance 2025-06 to add overlay districts and tightly limit off-premise signage after a property owner sued over a rejected reader-board sign; proponents said the overlay would allow advertising in limited interstate-exit locations while preventing sign clustering.
Newport’s City Council approved consideration of the first reading of ordinance 2025-06 on Tuesday, a zoning change that would create overlay districts and narrowly permit off-premise advertising signs in limited commercial locations.
City attorney Terry Hurst and planning staff described the ordinance as a targeted response to a pending lawsuit from a sign company that asked to place a large reader-board sign on Cosby Highway. Planning staff said the sign did not meet current size and location requirements and the planning commission had mixed views; the overlay is intended to authorize specific sign types in carefully defined C-3 (interstate-exit) areas if they meet new height, size and distance rules.
“It's highly regulated, and it's only in limited locations,” a planning representative said during discussion, adding the overlay would set height, size and distance restrictions so “you couldn't have…a cluster” of signs near one another. The city’s administration argued that approving the overlay would resolve the lawsuit and avoid a judicial order that could allow a single sign — and then subsequent, unregulated signs — to be placed near the interstate exits.
Opponents’ concerns were acknowledged during the discussion; council members asked whether approving the overlay would invite requests for more signage in the future. Supporters said the ordinance includes distance restrictions designed to prevent proliferation and that the change would bring the city’s rules closer to those used in other municipalities.
Council approved consideration of the first reading by voice vote. The ordinance will return for a second reading and final vote at a later meeting.
Provenance: The ordinance and the discussion of the lawsuit and overlay district were presented beginning at SEG 285 and continued through SEG 451. The planning rationale and legal context were summarized during that range.
