Clarkdale advisory committee reviews draft Chapter 7 on signage, sets Nov. 6 final review before planning commission
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
The Zoning Code Update Citizen Advisory Committee met Oct. 16 in Clarkdale to review a near-final draft of Chapter 7 (signs) of the town's zoning code and to set a schedule for further review. Chair Spence called the session to order and the committee discussed technical changes, legal constraints, and editorial cleanups before directing staff to return with revised text for a Nov. 6 final review and a subsequent referral to the Planning Commission.
The chapter rewrite focuses on bringing local sign rules into compliance with recent case law and state changes while consolidating and clarifying measurement and permitting processes. Ruth, a staff member in the Community Development area, summarized the legal constraints driving the rewrite: "we can only judge . . . manner and placement, size, those sorts of things. We can't regulate content," and said the draft removes language that previously relied on subjective goals such as protecting property values.
Why it matters: the committee must adopt the full zoning code update in a single package, so Chapter 7 changes affect businesses, historic properties and how the town administers permits and appeals. Committee members repeatedly pressed staff for precise, administrable language because local enforcement and applicants will rely on clear measurement rules and process steps.
Most significant revisions and committee directions
- Political sign zones: The draft updates the political-sign-free-zone map. Cement Plant Road was removed from the free zone (political signs are now allowed there), and the town park, the town complex and Selma Mangini Park were newly included as sign-free areas. Committee members asked staff to confirm the statutory language for political signs and to match the municipal code text to state law precisely.
- Measurement of sign area: The draft adopts a perimeter-based method: sign area will be measured by drawing a single perimeter around sign copy rather than summing individual letters. Staff said the change is intended to simplify administrative review and reduce staff time spent calculating unusual configurations.
- Design vs. content limits: The committee instructed staff to strip references that regulate aesthetic "character" or ideological content in line with the cited court guidance (Reid v. Gilbert) and to retain only objective, measurable standards for size, placement and illumination.
- Authority and appeals: The code draft currently reads that deviations would be reviewed by town council; members asked staff to change that reference to the Board of Adjustment (BOA) where appropriate. Several members stressed the BOA meets infrequently and that the council has sometimes acted as BOA; staff noted they will standardize references to the BOA where a variance is required.
- Administrative approvals and timelines: Routine sign permits are to be approved administratively by the Community Development Department; only requests for deviations, variances or unique design interpretations (to be routed to the BOA) will escalate. Staff added a new timeline for an initial completeness review followed by substantive review; applicants may appeal interpretations of completeness to the BOA.
- Nonconforming signs: The draft clarifies that signs legally nonconforming at adoption remain so but that if a sign is damaged or destroyed to 50% or more of its area or value, the replacement must comply with the new code. The committee discussed language clarifying repair vs. vandalism and asked staff to tighten the wording.
- Illumination and illumination buffers: The draft restricts sign illumination within 75 feet of residential districts except where allowed in a planned unit or planned area development; all fixtures must be fully or partially shielded.
- Temporary, portable and special-event signs: Members debated how to treat portable sandwich-board signs, inflatable decorations and temporary banners. The draft permits portable signs in the central business, commercial and industrial districts with enumerated restrictions; it treats seasonal/holiday decorations differently from signs. The committee discussed a proposed 30-day limit per calendar quarter for certain banners and temporary signs and asked staff to return with clearer, enforceable duration and permitting language (including when a permit is required for signs over 6 sq. ft.).
- Murals and signs: Members asked staff to add language distinguishing artistic murals from signage that advertises a business or product. The committee wanted a clear rule so applicants cannot use murals to circumvent sign-area limits (for example, embedding business names/logos in murals).
Edits and next steps
Staff (Ruth and Senior Planner Clover) will incorporate numerous wording fixes raised by members — including consistent capitalization and numbering, relettering sections after removals, and replacing references to other bodies where the BOA is the correct appeal body. The committee scheduled a Nov. 6 meeting for a final review of Chapter 7; staff will then forward the chapter to the Planning Commission so commissioners can become familiar with the draft before a public hearing. The committee also noted Chapters 8–12 will be scheduled across November and December, with Chapter 8 to begin Nov. 6 and Chapter 9 to be discussed on Nov. 20 and Dec. 4.
Votes and formal actions
A motion to approve the minutes from the Sept. 18 meeting was made and seconded; the chair announced the motion carried. The meeting concluded after a motion and second to adjourn.
Tangible items staff will return with include a revised Chapter 7 that: (1) normalizes the political-sign map and statutory language; (2) implements perimeter-based sign-area measurement; (3) changes references to BOA where variances are required; (4) clarifies nonconforming-sign replacement thresholds; (5) tightens temporary/portable sign duration and permitting triggers; and (6) adds clearer rules distinguishing murals from signs. The committee asked staff to resolve phrasing ambiguities before the Nov. 6 packet distribution.
The meeting included extended line-by-line discussion of existing and proposed subsections and multiple requests for editorial cleanup; no final ordinance or variance was adopted at the Oct. 16 meeting.
The chapter rewrite focuses on bringing local sign rules into compliance with recent case law and state changes while consolidating and clarifying measurement and permitting processes. Ruth, a staff member in the Community Development area, summarized the legal constraints driving the rewrite: "we can only judge . . . manner and placement, size, those sorts of things. We can't regulate content," and said the draft removes language that previously relied on subjective goals such as protecting property values.
Why it matters: the committee must adopt the full zoning code update in a single package, so Chapter 7 changes affect businesses, historic properties and how the town administers permits and appeals. Committee members repeatedly pressed staff for precise, administrable language because local enforcement and applicants will rely on clear measurement rules and process steps.
Most significant revisions and committee directions
- Political sign zones: The draft updates the political-sign-free-zone map. Cement Plant Road was removed from the free zone (political signs are now allowed there), and the town park, the town complex and Selma Mangini Park were newly included as sign-free areas. Committee members asked staff to confirm the statutory language for political signs and to match the municipal code text to state law precisely.
- Measurement of sign area: The draft adopts a perimeter-based method: sign area will be measured by drawing a single perimeter around sign copy rather than summing individual letters. Staff said the change is intended to simplify administrative review and reduce staff time spent calculating unusual configurations.
- Design vs. content limits: The committee instructed staff to strip references that regulate aesthetic "character" or ideological content in line with the cited court guidance (Reid v. Gilbert) and to retain only objective, measurable standards for size, placement and illumination.
- Authority and appeals: The code draft currently reads that deviations would be reviewed by town council; members asked staff to change that reference to the Board of Adjustment (BOA) where appropriate. Several members stressed the BOA meets infrequently and that the council has sometimes acted as BOA; staff noted they will standardize references to the BOA where a variance is required.
- Administrative approvals and timelines: Routine sign permits are to be approved administratively by the Community Development Department; only requests for deviations, variances or unique design interpretations (to be routed to the BOA) will escalate. Staff added a new timeline for an initial completeness review followed by substantive review; applicants may appeal interpretations of completeness to the BOA.
- Nonconforming signs: The draft clarifies that signs legally nonconforming at adoption remain so but that if a sign is damaged or destroyed to 50% or more of its area or value, the replacement must comply with the new code. The committee discussed language clarifying repair vs. vandalism and asked staff to tighten the wording.
- Illumination and illumination buffers: The draft restricts sign illumination within 75 feet of residential districts except where allowed in a planned unit or planned area development; all fixtures must be fully or partially shielded.
- Temporary, portable and special-event signs: Members debated how to treat portable sandwich-board signs, inflatable decorations and temporary banners. The draft permits portable signs in the central business, commercial and industrial districts with enumerated restrictions; it treats seasonal/holiday decorations differently from signs. The committee discussed a proposed 30-day limit per calendar quarter for certain banners and temporary signs and asked staff to return with clearer, enforceable duration and permitting language (including when a permit is required for signs over 6 sq. ft.).
- Murals and signs: Members asked staff to add language distinguishing artistic murals from signage that advertises a business or product. The committee wanted a clear rule so applicants cannot use murals to circumvent sign-area limits (for example, embedding business names/logos in murals).
Edits and next steps
Staff (Ruth and Senior Planner Clover) will incorporate numerous wording fixes raised by members — including consistent capitalization and numbering, relettering sections after removals, and replacing references to other bodies where the BOA is the correct appeal body. The committee scheduled a Nov. 6 meeting for a final review of Chapter 7; staff will then forward the chapter to the Planning Commission so commissioners can become familiar with the draft before a public hearing. The committee also noted Chapters 8–12 will be scheduled across November and December, with Chapter 8 to begin Nov. 6 and Chapter 9 to be discussed on Nov. 20 and Dec. 4.
Votes and formal actions
A motion to approve the minutes from the Sept. 18 meeting was made and seconded; the chair announced the motion carried. The meeting concluded after a motion and second to adjourn.
Tangible items staff will return with include a revised Chapter 7 that: (1) normalizes the political-sign map and statutory language; (2) implements perimeter-based sign-area measurement; (3) changes references to BOA where variances are required; (4) clarifies nonconforming-sign replacement thresholds; (5) tightens temporary/portable sign duration and permitting triggers; and (6) adds clearer rules distinguishing murals from signs. The committee asked staff to resolve phrasing ambiguities before the Nov. 6 packet distribution.
The meeting included extended line-by-line discussion of existing and proposed subsections and multiple requests for editorial cleanup; no final ordinance or variance was adopted at the Oct. 16 meeting.
View full meeting
This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.
View full meeting