Council reviews broad rewrite of sign ordinance, asks staff to clarify temporary/permanent language

City staff presented a comprehensive update to the sign ordinance to align building‑code changes with modern sign types and address public concerns about brightness, safety and aesthetics.

Joe Hilburn summarized the main changes under consideration: allowing certain electronic signs with controls on message duration and brightness (minimum message display durations, a two‑second transition limit, and a 10 p.m. curfew unless the business is open), model policies for inflatable and temporary signs, and clear limits and setbacks for exempt signs. Hilburn said the draft would permit inflatable signs under controls and distinguish between residential and commercial sign allowances.

Council members raised several specific issues they asked staff to refine: clearer definitions and limits distinguishing temporary versus permanent signs (particularly for model homes and long‑running construction signs), size and placement standards (one councilor suggested increasing single‑lot real‑estate sign area from 6 square feet to 8), how the 10‑foot setback requirement applies to different exempt signage, political sign sizing limits, management of illuminated school or athletic event signage that can extend past 10 p.m., and how the city ordinance would interact with homeowners’ association covenants. Several councilors urged plain‑language clarity to make the ordinance defensible and enforceable.

Council asked staff to remove ambiguous phrasing around “temporary” signs in the current section addressing model homes, to provide sample sign prototypes or examples, and to return with clarifying language and any state‑law conformity checks before public hearings. No vote was taken; the item will be revised and returned for future consideration.