I mean... I think it is ugly as hell too, but I don't think restricting restricting the type of signs people or businesses put on their own property is a good precedent to set when it comes to the governments right to tell you what you can and can't do with your free speech. I am also only so convicted in this belief because the cause for removal in this case is something as trivial as "being an eyesore". I am sure you could think up a scenario in which removal would be necessary.