The Historic Landmark Commission held a work session on historic-district signage, beautification standards and existing neighborhood grant programs and gave staff direction to pursue further coordination rather than adopt new rules at this time.

Staff summary: Cameron, a staff member, presented an overview of existing programs and constraints. He said the city's street-sign topper program (started in 2022) allows neighborhoods to install decorative toppers but noted there is no city budget for the program in the current fiscal year and that participating neighborhoods must cover costs themselves. "Currently, we do have 8 neighborhoods that are taking advantage of this," Cameron said. He also described the Oak Hickory Historic District'which uses brown-and-white entry signs'and noted staff could not locate a file explaining why that district adopted that style.

Available programs and funding: Staff reviewed three programs that can assist historic neighborhoods: a Neighborhood Empowerment Grant (reimbursement up to $10,000 requiring a 100% match from the neighborhood through cash, in-kind or volunteer hours); a Homeowner Repair Assistance Program that assists with exterior repairs; and a Rental Repair Assistance program that can provide up to $24,500 per unit for repairs to eligible rental units. Cameron urged commissioners to consider outreach and partnerships so eligible residents know about these programs.

Key discussion points: Commissioners discussed several practical approaches rather than immediate regulation. Multiple commissioners favored consistent signage for locally designated historic districts (for example, brown-and-white signs or consistent toppers at entry points) to make historic districts easier to identify; one commissioner suggested pairing large entry signs on major approaches with smaller sign toppers at intersections. Commissioners also discussed aligning signage upgrades with routine street-sign replacement cycles to reduce added cost and suggested asking the IT/mapping team to flag historic-district boundaries in online maps (for example, Google Maps) as a low-cost complement to physical signs.

Code enforcement and incentives: Commissioners asked whether code enforcement treats historic properties differently; staff said enforcement practices are currently the same for all properties but noted other cities sometimes create dedicated historic-property code officers or tailored enforcement practices. Commissioners expressed interest in learning best practices for incentivizing maintenance (grants, education and community engagement) rather than relying solely on enforcement.

Direction to staff: Commissioners asked staff to: (1) invite Community Services to a future meeting to explain neighborhood grant programs and eligibility; (2) explore simple mapping/wayfinding options with IT (for example, mapping historic-district boundaries on online maps); (3) return with options for consistent signage styles and an estimate of likely costs tied to street-sign replacement cycles; and (4) keep the issue on the project matrix to follow up when a city budget is available. Staff will present more detailed options and coordinate potential outreach to neighborhoods.

Ending: The commission did not adopt new beautification standards at this meeting; commissioners emphasized outreach, consistent signage and targeted use of existing grant programs and agreed to revisit the topic when staff can present cost estimates and community-services input.