The signs haven't always been technically legal, however. A law instituted by the city in 1972 outlawed identification signs in communities unless the area was considered historic. Now city staff are reconsidering the law.

The San Jose City Council voted unanimously on Feb. 25 to look into amending the 31-year-old policy, which, in addition to forbidding the installation of community identification signs in nonhistorical areas required the removal of existing signs within five years of installation. Signage was described as signs, banners or "architectural/gateway monuments."

The council sent the policy to city staff for review, with explicit instructions to look into the feasibility of allowing neighborhood organizations to build and erect signs. The council acknowledged that the law was approved during a time when communities were being annexed into San Jose at a rapid pace and the city wanted a united feeling. But, council members said, three decades later the city is well-established and neighborhood signs would not impact San Jose's overall identity.

"Given the way San Jose was growing at the time, the idea was to serve the greater good and for neighborhoods to become part of the larger city," said Stephen Haase, director of the San Jose Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement.

However, annexation did not eliminate the uniqueness of San Jose communities.

"I think we have a sensitivity to the community and neighborhood character, and we want to preserve that," Haase said.

The council had deferred the item twice—on Dec. 17 and Feb. 11—after spending an hour discussing the issue with Joseph Horwedel, deputy director of planning implementation with the San Jose Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement.

Mayor Ron Gonzales' main concern was whether allowing neighborhoods to erect identification signs might create a sense of division among adjoining neighborhoods. Horwedel stressed that the new policy would require signage not be used to mark boundaries but to help facilitate a prominent neighborhood's sense of community pride.

Another concern the council brought up was who would be responsible for erecting and maintaining the signs.

Howedel said that the city would neither make nor maintain neighborhood signage but would require neighborhood organizations to make them out of materials that could withstand harsh sunlight and extreme weather. But any erected signs would belong to the city, with neighborhood organizations responsible for their construction and maintenance.

San Jose District 6 City Council member Ken Yeager said he was excited about this new policy. He represents two very distinctive and well-established neighborhoods, Willow Glen and the Rose Garden area.

There are three signs in the community that recognize Willow Glen as a unique area.

On what is now the Sylvan Learning Center, located at the corner of Lincoln and Minnesota avenues, is a sign reading "Smile! You're In Willow Glen."

Further down Lincoln Avenue at Garfield Avenue, the Rotten Robbie gas station displays a large billboard with the phrase, "Welcome to Willow Glen."

The same message appears on the railroad overpass above Bird Avenue, near the Highway 280 on- and off-ramps.

Horwedel said these signs are exceptions to the rule since none of these examples actually identify boundaries or contribute to "visual clutter."

Haase said, "Our goal is to avoid too much signage that dominates the landscape, so we need to exercise discretion regarding that, because 'visual clutter' is in the eye of the beholder."

John Gibbs, president of the Willow Glen Neighborhood Association, said he isn't familiar enough with the new policy to comment but would be very interested if the community approached the WGNA about putting up signs.