Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Planning topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council resists request to allow wall signs on new multifamily project, citing signage precedent

Agoura Hills City Council · May 27, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Developer Greyar sought a pre‑screen amendment to permit a wall sign for a 278‑unit multifamily project; council members said Agoura Hills has historically limited wall and illuminated signage and indicated they were not inclined to open the municipal code now. No formal legislative action was taken.

Developer Greyar presented renderings and asked the City Council for non‑binding feedback on a proposed municipal code change that would allow one wall sign for a new 278‑unit multifamily project (the "Bellamy" project) facing Roadside Drive. The applicant said the wall sign would add a visible architectural accent to the approved building façade.

Community Development Director Robbie Nessik explained the request: wall signs are not permitted for multifamily uses under current code (sign silence treated as prohibition), while monument signs are allowed for residential complexes. Proposed standards would mirror commercial size limits and include lighting and color temperature constraints.

Several council members said the city's identity and prior work on a comprehensive sign ordinance favor limiting new wall and illuminated signs. "Signage is one of the most sensitive topics for our residents," Mayor Pro Tem Tim Klein Lopez said, referencing billboards and prior extensive ordinance updates. Council members stressed precedent concerns and suggested the applicant explore alternative architectural or landscape solutions.

Applicant Steve Martin (Greyar) said he and his team appreciate staff's review and were sensitive to neighborhood character, but noted the sign improves façade legibility and marketing. Council gave non‑binding feedback opposing a code change at this time; staff will relay the council's comments to the applicant. No ordinance amendment was initiated and no vote was taken.

What to watch: If the developer pursues a formal zoning amendment, council and staff indicated the matter would require broader council review and community outreach because changing the sign code would set city‑wide precedent.