Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lucas Council reviews broad revision to sign ordinance, asks staff for clearer language
Summary
The council reviewed proposed amendments to the city sign code covering electronic signs, inflatable signs, model‑home signs, exempt sign setbacks, political/real‑estate sign sizes and enforcement; members asked staff to clarify temporary vs. permanent standards and several size and setback details.
The Lucas City Council spent significant time Feb. 19 reviewing proposed changes to the sign ordinance (Chapter 3, Article 3.16), with staff walking the council through new rules for electronic message displays, nonconforming signs, temporary signage and exemptions.
Joe Hilburn, who presented the draft ordinance, said electronic (digital) signs would be readable, limited to minimum message durations (30 seconds per message), limited change rates and a standard turn‑off time at 10 p.m. unless the business was open 24/7. He said the draft also references recommended model templates and encourages use of Texas Police Chiefs Association model policies where appropriate.
Council members questioned several specific provisions, including the definition and treatment of temporary versus permanent model‑home signage, the appropriate square footage for real‑estate signs (several council members suggested increasing the code’s 6 sq. ft. to 8 sq. ft.), setbacks for exempt signs from the pavement edge, and whether inflatable signs should be allowed at all. Several members urged the staff to remove ambiguous language and return with clearer definitions and examples.
“Some of these things are not clear,” one councilmember said, asking staff to draft language that explicitly addresses signs expected to remain for extended periods (for example, model‑home or subdivision entry signs) versus short‑term temporary signs.
Council discussed enforcement and noted that homeowners‑association covenants are separate from city code and that the city cannot enforce HOA covenants; the city’s ordinance will set the minimum allowable standard and HOAs may be more restrictive.
There was no vote on adoption on Feb. 19. Staff was asked to revise the draft to clarify temporary/permanent thresholds, sizing and setback language and to return for additional review and a public hearing.
