Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use And Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Los Ranchos adopts broad zoning and sign-code revisions, bans pole-mounted signs
Summary
Trustees approved Ordinance 303 to consolidate definitions and rewrite sign regulations. The board voted to prohibit pole-mounted signs, discussed illuminated-sign limits and adopted several clarifying edits to the code.
Get email alerts on the Land Use And Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
After a public hearing and extended discussion, the Los Ranchos Board of Trustees adopted Ordinance 303 on Nov. 19, a package that consolidates code definitions and substantially rewrites the village’s sign regulations. The vote followed debate over pole-mounted and illuminated signs and a public comment urging retention of a 'build-to line' definition.
Planner Shannon Schultz said the amendments primarily consolidate scattered definitions and make the sign code more enforceable and easier for applicants to understand. She said the rewrite removes content-based restrictions and relies on measurable standards such as illuminance limits and the village’s night-sky rules. "This effort seeks to consolidate all the definitions from the code into the definition section... and make the sign code easier to enforce," Schultz said.
Trustees debated whether to prohibit pole-mounted signs. Supporters described pole signs as cheaper, less consistent with village design goals and harder to regulate; opponents raised concerns about design exceptions for municipal banners. The board moved and approved an amendment to prohibit pole-mounted signs in the village. The ordinance also includes a new requirement that illuminated signs be extinguished by 11 p.m. unless the business is open to the public, and staff retained night-sky and foot-lambert light-level standards to limit light spill to adjacent properties.
Public commenter Vincent Sanchez urged trustees to keep the code’s former 'build-to line' definition to avoid unintended erosions of code clarity; trustees discussed whether the unused definition should be reinstated and deferred a broader review to future code work. The ordinance passed on a recorded vote.

