Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Signs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
River Heights commission to rewrite sign rules after council feedback
Summary
The planning commission reviewed a draft sign ordinance sent back by City Council for clarity, agreed to combine 'portable' and 'temporary' definitions and asked a member to research other cities and return a clearer draft with recommended size and height limits.
The River Heights Planning & Zoning Commission on Jan. 13 agreed to revise the city’s sign ordinance after the City Council sent the draft back for clarification on the difference between “portable” and “temporary” signage. The commission did not vote on an amendment but assigned follow-up work and asked staff and one commissioner to produce a clearer draft.
Members said the council’s questions showed the existing draft was confusing. “I feel like I have to decipher it every time, and it’s not like they ask me enough for me to remember,” an attendee said, summarizing the staff difficulty in enforcing the current chart-based rule. Commissioners debated whether the ordinance needs separate categories for institutional signs such as schools and churches, or whether those should be addressed case-by-case by the council.
Discussion focused on definitions and on objective limits. Commissioners discussed square-foot and height limits (members noted examples of 3 square feet and a 6-foot maximum height in the draft that appeared internally inconsistent). Some members favored combining the “portable” and “temporary” categories into a single, clearer definition; others warned that over-defining exceptions for institutions could create loopholes.
The commission directed a member to review how nearby jurisdictions, including Providence and North Logan, treat temporary and portable signage and to return with a recommendation. Staff also agreed to provide the working Word draft to the assigned commissioner for editing. No change to the code was adopted at the meeting; the commission framed the work as clarifying language before returning a revised draft to City Council for consideration.
The commission’s next step is a research and redraft assignment; a clearer ordinance is expected back to the commission for further editing before any formal recommendation to the City Council.
