Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Vagueness topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission debate highlights perceived vagueness in Natchitoches sign code
Summary
Residents and some commissioners said the city’s sign definition reads like an advertising rule and is ambiguous for artworks; staff and the chair said the code defines a wall sign broadly and the appeals route to city council exists for policy changes.
Public commenters and several commissioners used the hearing to focus on the municipal code’s language and whether the definition of “sign” fits installations that promote the town rather than a business.
Ryan Stronghouse read the ordinance language aloud and told the commission he found the definition "vague" in the context of this installation, saying the code appears to focus on advertising. "I consider it vague," he said. Several speakers urged clearer rules so owners and artists could know what is permissible before placing artwork in the district.
The commission chair and staff described the statutory process: the commission enforces the ordinance adopted by city council, and property owners may appeal a commission decision to council. Staff explained that a full application (diagrams, color samples and dimensions) would allow the commission to review an installation before it is placed. Commissioners encouraged community members to bring proposed code changes to city council if they want a policy that explicitly allows murals or town-promotion art.
The hearing highlighted a tension commissioners described as recurring: protecting the district’s architectural and historic character while allowing public-art opportunities. The commission said it will continue enforcing current code while city council and staff consider ordinance language changes.
