Broken Arrow City Council
Meeting of: 07-16-2019
Title:
title
Consideration, discussion, and possible adoption of Ordinance No. 3586 amending the Broken Arrow Code of Ordinances, Appendix A - Chapter 5, Development Standards, Section 5.7, Signs, specifically amending the purpose and intent of the Sign Ordinance, bringing the Ordinance into compliance with federal law, establishing criteria for digital signs, amending the criteria for signs in Areas 5 and 6 of the Downtown Residential Overlay District, allowing and establishing criteria for commercial signs in Area 7 of the Downtown Residential Overlay District, and adding sections for pole signs, sandwich board signs, signs for educational institutions, and a Definitions section; repealing all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith; and declaring an emergency
End
Background:
Section 5.7 of the Zoning Ordinance is proposed to be modified to update the Sign Code requirements. The existing Sign Code was approved by the City Council in January 2008 and has been in effect since February 2008 with modifications/updates in preceding years.
In 2015, the Supreme Court ruled in Reed v. Town of Gilbert, AZ, 135 S.Ct. 2218 (2015) that the town's sign regulations were content based and unconstitutional regulation of speech because it included different rules for different categories of signs. If a sign code includes content based language, it is subject to strict scrutiny by the courts and the municipality must be able to demonstrate that the language is included to further a compelling government interest. One way to show a compelling government interest is to establish a clear purpose and intent for the code. A section outlining the purpose and intent of the Sign Ordinance is proposed to be expanded in Section 5.7.
Since Reed v. Town of Gilbert, AZ, many communities across the country have amended their sign codes to ensure that language within the code is not content based and complies with this rul...
Click here for full text