Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Signs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pasco planning commissioners recommend allowing sandwich‑board signs in downtown overlay
Summary
The City of Pasco Planning Commission unanimously recommended that City Council consider a targeted code amendment to allow sandwich‑board signs in the Downtown Pasco Overlay District with placement, ADA and removal rules, and a hold‑harmless clause. Staff said the item will go to a Feb. 9 workshop and is targeted for ordinance adoption Feb. 17, 2026.
The City of Pasco Planning Commission on Tuesday voted unanimously to recommend a staff‑draft code amendment that would allow sandwich‑board signs in the public right‑of‑way only within the Downtown Pasco Overlay District and a 300‑foot buffer around it.
Planner Eileen Bargan, who presented the proposal, said the amendment is limited in scope and intended to give downtown businesses a clear, regulated option for temporary sidewalk signs. “This proposal as directed by City Council is limited in scope. It applies only to the Downtown Pasco Overlay District and a 300 foot buffer surrounding it,” she said, adding the draft would update Title 17 by adding a new section (PMC 17.15.0.025) that specifies placement, numbers per business, allowable hours of display, ADA clearance and special rules near intersections.
Supporters on the commission said the change provides predictability for businesses and clearer lines for enforcement. “I really like how this is moving forward with staying in the downtown area … it will add to the beauty of that area with being consistent throughout the area,” Commissioner Pat Jones said.
Commissioners raised practical concerns about safety and enforcement. Commissioner Lerman urged language requiring signs to be constructed or weighted to avoid tipping in Pasco’s wind, saying, “Sign shall remain in good condition repaired and maintained as needed” should be enforced to prevent hazards. Director Matson acknowledged enforcement capacity limits, noting code‑enforcement work is largely complaint‑driven and that the city currently has two code‑enforcement staff; he said staff would take enforcement‑resourcing questions to City Council. Matson said the city has previously allocated CDBG funds tied to code enforcement and estimated roughly $70,000 in that round of CDBG funding related to enforcement positions, but he noted that allocation details would need verification.
Bargan said the draft also includes an enforcement and removal process and a hold‑harmless clause to reduce city liability when business owners place signs in the right‑of‑way.
The commission closed the public hearing after receiving no public testimony and then voted to forward CA2025‑002 to City Council with the staff recommendation.
Next steps: staff will forward the commission’s recommendation to the City Council for a workshop scheduled Feb. 9, with the ordinance targeted for the council meeting on Feb. 17, 2026.
