A useful sign-code research record lets another person retrace an answer. “The sign can be this size” is difficult to check without the site, sign type, source section, and conditions behind it. This worksheet keeps those pieces together and gives missing answers a place to live. It is a research aid, not an application form or a determination that a design is allowed.
Download the blank authority and source worksheet (plain text). Open it in a text editor, copy it into your project notes, or print it. Keep the completed record in your own project files; this download does not submit your answers to FreeCodeChecks. Duplicate the sign, authority, source, and question sections as needed.
1. Fix the location and the proposal before collecting answers
Give the project a short reference and record the address as entered, the matched address, and a parcel reference if one is available. Add a marked plan showing the proposed sign location. If the address or map pin points to a shopping-center entrance instead of the tenant space, write that discrepancy down before carrying a result forward.
Assign each proposed sign an ID, such as S-01. Describe its mounting, location, proposed dimensions and units, lighting, and whether the work is a new installation, replacement, alteration, or removal. Keep the owner's description separate from any classification you find in the code. “Monument sign” in a sales drawing is a proposal label until you have checked the relevant definition.
2. Make one authority record for each question
Avoid a single “approved by city” box. Instead, record which office you are checking with and the exact question it is expected to answer. An office identified for a zoning question does not, by itself, settle an electrical, road, or property-owner question. Leave applicability unresolved when you have not established it.
| Field | What to write |
|---|---|
| Office and role | Full agency or office name; the particular question, such as sign-district identification. |
| Basis for using it | Official directory, jurisdiction map, published instructions, or a written response, with a source ID. |
| Location and scope | Address or parcel checked and the sign IDs covered by the inquiry. |
| Result and limit | What the source establishes, what it leaves open, and whether a further determination is needed. |
Use the authority guide to organize this investigation. The worksheet does not assume that a postal city name proves who regulates the site.
3. Give every source a version and a job
Label sources D-01, D-02, and so on. For an ordinance, preserve the title, section, publisher, URL, and any displayed edition, amendment, or effective-date information. For a map, record the layer, legend, selected parcel or location, and displayed update information. Save the relevant page or map view with enough surrounding context to understand it later.
Keep the date you accessed a source separate from its displayed effective or update date. Opening a page today does not establish that its text took effect today. If no version is shown, record “not shown” and make currency a question to resolve; do not supply a guessed date.
Write what you are using the source for. A permit checklist may help identify submission materials; do not silently turn it into evidence for a dimensional limit. For a limit, retain the definition, table heading, units, footnotes, and exceptions needed to understand the provision. A cropped number cannot carry that context.
4. Separate observations, assumptions, and unresolved conclusions
These are worksheet labels, not legal statuses. Use them consistently for each individual statement, rather than assigning one confidence label to the entire project.
- Observed: what a named source actually says or shows, with its source ID and locator.
- Applicability unresolved: the provision is recorded, but its connection to this parcel or sign has not been established.
- Working assumption: an input used to explore a design, with the person responsible for checking it.
- Conflict: two pieces of evidence disagree; preserve both and identify the question that would resolve the difference.
- Response received: an office answered a specific question; retain the wording, date, scope, and any conditions.
Do not convert “not found” into “no restriction.” A missing answer tells the next researcher where to continue. Likewise, an office response should remain limited to the question and facts presented; it is not automatically an issued permit.
A worked example: a map result is not yet a sign allowance
This example is fictional and supplies no real jurisdiction, property, or rule value. A designer proposes an illuminated wall sign S-01. A saved map view D-01 displays “District X” at the selected point, but the project record does not yet show that the point falls on the correct tenant parcel or whether another map layer applies.
- Observed: D-01 displays District X at the selected point.
- Working assumption: the point represents the sign's parcel. Assigned to the project researcher for checking.
- Applicability unresolved: the district provisions have not been connected to the exact site and proposed sign.
- Question Q-01: does the selected location match the parcel, and which district or overlay provisions should be reviewed for S-01?
- Handoff result: no dimensional allowance is carried into the design from this map result alone.
When the location is checked, retain the original entry and add a dated resolution linked to the new evidence. That preserves why a later conclusion differs. For an example using actual official sources, see the Austin permit research walkthrough.
5. Close questions with evidence, then recheck when the project changes
Give each open question an owner, the evidence needed to answer it, and the design or filing decision it holds up. Record a target date for your own follow-up; do not confuse that date with an agency deadline. To close a question, attach the source or response and explain exactly which part it resolves. Leave any remaining part open.
Recheck the affected entries when the address, sign type, dimensions, lighting, or installation scope changes, when you learn of a source update, and before relying on the record for a submission. A changed input may invalidate only some entries; mark which ones need another look instead of stamping the whole file “current.”
If you use a FreeCodeChecks report, put its reference and displayed source dates in this record. Treat each cited provision, labeled assumption, and unanswered field separately. Our report methodology explains that distinction. Coverage varies, and this worksheet is usable even when a report does not supply an answer.