Commissioners urge council to revisit 'unlimited' yard‑sign language in proposed sign code

During the sign‑code discussion, commissioners focused on a council direction that removed a numerical cap on temporary freestanding noncommercial signs on private parcels, replacing a prior limit (two) with a council‑directed "no limit." Commissioners expressed concern that "unlimited" could be abused and discussed alternatives such as a small numeric cap or a square‑footage limit.

"I think that unlimited is could be a recipe for disaster," Chair Justin Zucker said during deliberations, raising enforcement and neighbor‑impact concerns. Commissioner Roland and others described scenarios where a yard could be filled repeatedly with identical campaign or commercial signs and suggested a rational numeric limit. Commissioner Roland said a realistic number based on local practice might be five signs: "So something that's in the realm of what people have not been objecting to the whole time would be, I think, a recommendation, like 5, for example." Commissioners also discussed options that would respect free‑speech protections while limiting visual clutter, including square‑footage caps and time limits.

Because of those concerns the commission voted to both recommend the ordinance as drafted and separately request that the city council revisit the removal of the numerical limit and consider numeric or spatial constraints. Staff said the council had directed the change to protect free speech and that the language could be revisited if abuse occurred; commissioners argued the council should consider a proactive limit before enforcement issues arise.