Council debates billboard relocation rules, directs staff to return with variance and amendment options

Coeur d'Alene City Council · December 17, 2024

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After prolonged debate, Coeur d'Alene council directed staff to draft amendments to the sign code that would give staff and council variance authority and to prepare two ordinance options addressing a 500-foot residential setback and a height exception. The issue arose after a billboard-company application discovered two code conflicts.

Coeur d'Alene ' A proposal from a billboard owner to move an existing billboard uncovered two conflicts with the city's recently amended sign code: a prohibition on increasing existing billboard height and a 500-foot minimum distance to residential zoning. Planning staff briefed council on the conflicts and maps of allowable relocation areas during the Dec. 17 meeting.

Renata (planning staff) said the applicant (Lamar) submitted an application to relocate a two-sided billboard from Northwest Boulevard to Government Way but the proposed site failed to meet two code provisions: the relocation would increase the sign's height and would sit closer than 500 feet to certain residential zones. Lamar subsequently withdrew and rescheduled its public hearing while staff and council examined options.

Council debate was lengthy and split. Councilmember Kiki moved to repeal the city language that permits billboard movement; supporters of the code change and other council members countered that wholesale repeal would be overbroad and unfair to a local business that upgraded signs and sought relocation. Several council members proposed narrower changes: remove or reduce the 500-foot threshold, permit a measured height exception, or create a formal variance process so staff or council can weigh specific tradeoffs in public hearings.

City attorney and staff advised that council could direct staff to draft ordinance options; after discussion council asked staff to return with two options at the first council meeting in January: one that narrows or eliminates the two specific restrictions (distance and height exception) and another that adds a variance mechanism allowing case-by-case review. Lamar's public hearing was expected to be scheduled for the second council meeting in January.

What to expect: Staff will prepare proposed code amendments and return to council for consideration; the applicant's request will be scheduled for a public hearing after council provides policy direction.