Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Signs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
After wide public comment, Wenatchee council pauses vote on billboard settlement and code changes
Summary
Council continued the public hearing on proposed amendments to the city sign code tied to an OutFront Media settlement and voted to table the ordinance until all seven council members can consider public input; the public hearing was continued to September 26 for additional written comment and deliberation.
The Wenatchee City Council halted final action on proposed sign-code amendments linked to a settlement with OutFront Media LLC after extended public comment and discussion.
Staff presented draft amendments to Wenatchee City Code (Title 10, signs and Chapter 10.72.050 nonconforming signs) that would implement terms of a settlement with OutFront Media. The settlement, as summarized by staff, would require removal of multiple existing billboard faces in town in exchange for allowing a single new digital billboard (two sign faces) within a defined area between 5th and Springwater on North Miller. Staff described proposed limits on size (maximum 30 feet height, 300 square feet per face), brightness controls, minimum dwell time, transition time, and a shutoff between midnight and 6 a.m., and required management programs to ensure compliance and avoid visibility from the state highway.
OutFront Media representatives said the company had voluntarily removed some signs, emphasized that the proposed digital sign would display static images with a minimum dwell time and no full-motion video, and highlighted public-safety benefits such as the ability to display emergency messages (e.g., missing-child alerts). Opponents from the public argued the city previously decided to prohibit billboards and that the amendments would reintroduce intrusive signage into community areas; speakers urged the council to maintain its prior billboard ban for aesthetic and quality-of-life reasons.
After hearing from several residents, a chamber representative and OutFront attorneys, Council Member Hoeflicker moved to table Ordinance 24-20 until a meeting when all seven council members would be present; the motion was seconded and passed. The council then clarified it would continue the public hearing to allow written comments to be added to the record and to reconvene public testimony at the next meeting; a continuation date of September 26 was set.
Council members cited concerns about location flexibility within the permitted zone, potential impacts on nearby residents, the midnight-to-6 a.m. shutoff window, and the need for additional public input—particularly because two council members were absent and two council seats were newly seated. Legal staff advised that continuing the hearing preserves the written record and allows the council to accept additional comments before acting.
The action does not adopt any code change; it paused decision-making so the full council can consider the settlement terms and community input at a subsequent meeting.
