Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Duvall council reviews major sign‑code rewrite, debates temporary sign and banner rules
Summary
Staff proposed content‑neutral sign‑code amendments: remove content‑based rules, consolidate sign types, and tighten temporary‑sign rules. Council discussed A‑frame/open‑house limits, political signs, and whether street‑pole banners should be installed by city staff for liability reasons.
City staff walked council through a line‑by‑line rewrite of Duvall Municipal Code Chapter 14.50 that would remove content‑based restrictions, reorganize sign types, and clarify rules for temporary signs and banners.
The revisions emphasize content neutrality and legal defensibility: staff proposed deleting provisions that directly regulated message content and reorganizing numeric limits and placement rules so enforcement depends on objective measures (size, height, sidewalk clearance, duration), not message.
Key practical debates centered on temporary signage (A‑frames, small post signs and open‑house stakes). Council members sought clearer numeric limits for items commonly seen in the field — how many open‑house stakes per frontage, separation distance between stake signs, limits on A‑frames on sidewalks without blocking pedestrian access — and asked staff to return with model rules used by neighboring cities. Staff warned that sidewalk‑placed A‑frames can create accessibility problems if not limited and recommended tight clearance rules.
Council also discussed banners on street poles and overhead banners. Staff said insurers and public‑works crews require city oversight and, in many cases, city staff installation for banners that attach to public light poles. Council favored a middle path for pole and street banners: allow banners only when the city or an endorsed city partner sponsors or co‑sponsors the display and adopt a formal banner policy rather than permit unconstrained third‑party use of city infrastructure.
On safety items, council voiced concern about highly kinetic or distracting commercial displays. Members generally supported removing moving/flashing light displays and inflatable “tube‑man” devices from permitted commercial promotion types because of visibility and crash‑risk concerns on state highways that run through the city.
Staff will return with a cleaner redline that contains the numeric limits (counts, setbacks and durations) and examples from other jurisdictions as requested.
