Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Sign Code topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Urbana holds public hearing on proposed rewrite of sign code; ordinance advances to another reading

Urbana City Council · December 2, 2025
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

Council held a public hearing and second reading on Ordinance 4632-25 to repeal and replace Chapter 1137 of the Urbana Codified Ordinances (sign code). Staff said changes consolidate sign rules; enforcement would be primarily complaint-driven and some signs will require permits. No final vote was taken.

Urbana City Council held a public hearing and advanced Ordinance 4632-25, which would repeal and replace Chapter 1137 of the Urbana Codified Ordinances governing signs, during its Dec. 2 meeting.

President Paul opened the hearing on the Planning Commission’s recommendation. Spencer Mitchell, the city’s Director of Administration, said the changes were recommended to consolidate all sign rules in a single chapter and that the proposal includes changes to sign sizes and the duration that postings may remain. “The changes were recommended by Planning Commission in order to have all the sign rules and regulations in one location,” Mitchell said.

Councilmember Mr. Thackery asked whether enforcement would be complaint-driven; Mitchell confirmed enforcement would rely primarily on complaints. Councilmember Mrs. Collier asked whether citizens would need permission to post signs; Mark Feinstein, Director of Law, said some signs require permits while others do not and that the code “expressly states which signs fall into which category.” No members of the public offered comments during the hearing. Later in the meeting, Mr. Thackery moved to place Ordinance 4632-25 on the floor for discussion and Mrs. Collier seconded; Spencer Mitchell said he had nothing to add beyond the public hearing and the ordinance received its second reading with no further council comments.

No vote to adopt the ordinance occurred at the Dec. 2 meeting; the measure will return for subsequent readings as required by local procedure.