Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutElectronic Readerboard Signs - Denial of Code Amendment 87-1 Authorized to Publish Advert sements of all kinw cluding public <' notices by Decree of the Superior Court of Orange County 1 California Number A 6214 dated 29 September 1961 and A 24831 dated 11 June 1963 STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of Orange Pubiw Notce AO anWn0 CO abd by In I anida t f eat n , pan, PUBLIC NOTICEwith 10 p"column adth NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING APPEAL OF THE PLANNING I am a Citizen of the United States and a resident of COMMISSION S DENIAL OF the County aforesaid I am over the age of eighteen CODE AMENDMENT NO 87 15 years and not a party to or interested in the below NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington entitled matter I am a principal clerk of the Orange Beach City Councilllwm hold a public hearing in the Coun Coast DAILY PILOT with which is combined the cil Chamber at the Hunt ington Beach Civic Center 000 Main Street Hunt NEWS PRESS a newspaper of general circulation 2000 Beach California on printed and published in the City of Costa Mesa the date and at the time in dicated below to receive and County of Orange State of California and that a consider the statements all persons who wish to be heard relative to the apple Notice of cation described below Pub11C Hearing DATE/TIME Monday July 18 1988 7 00 PM public hearing continued open from 6/20/8811 of which copy attached hereto is a true and complete Code PAmendimOen No 887E 5 I1, (Appeal) I copy was printed and published in the Costa Mesa I APPLICANT Wilson Ford APPELLANT Rod Wilson Newport Beach Huntington Beach Fountain Valley t Eie�tra Media I REQUEST To amend Irvine the South Coast communities and Laguna Article 961 (Sign Code) of one e time e the Huntington Beach Ordi Beach issues of said newspaper for nance Code to allow elec ironic reader boards The *HJHIZ* iX to wit the issue(s) o Planning Commission has +' ` f reviewed a draft ordinance for the proposed electronic reader boards for City Court cil consideration July 8 ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS Exempt from the 198 California Environmental Quality Act I ON FILE A copy of the proposed request is on file in 198 the Department of Com munity Development 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach CA 92648 or in 198 ptec on by the public NOTE Thecontinued pub lic hearings on the two ap peals filed by Rod Wilson 198 Electra Media relative to Special Sign Permit 87 18 and Special Sign Permit 87 19 are scheduled as fol 19$ low (Special Sign Permit No 87 18 on August 15 1988)and(Special Sign Per mit 87 19 on August 1 1988) ALL INTERESTED PER I declare under penalty of {perjury that the SONS are invited to attend foregoing is true and correct said hearing and express s opinions or submit evidence for or against the application as outlined above' If there are any further questions please call Scott Hess As Executed on July 8 198 �L— 536 527e Planner at at Costa Mes California HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY COUNCIL By Allcla, 1 M Wentworth City Clerk Phone (714)536 5405 Dated 7/5/88 Signature Published Orange Coast Daily Pilot July 8 1988 11 b05 PROOF OF PUBLICATION REQUE6 s FOR CITY COUNCIPACTION api �-1 -ab Ao- ,n►J �ro K)c7 day o -�-7�C, Ao lSDate June 20, 1988 Submitted to onorablle Mayor and City Council Submitted by Paul Cook, City Administrator Prepared by Douglas N La Belle, Director, Community Developmen Subject APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION' S DENIAL OF CODE AMENDMENT NO 87-15 (CONTINUED FROM MARCH 28, 1988) Consistent with Council Policy? 2 d)t& '.4 � � Yes �,New Policy or Exception ®Ie0 al Y? Statement of issue Recommendation Analysis Fundinq Source Alternative Actions Attachments STATEMENT OF ISSUE Transmitted for your consideration are the recommendations of the Planning Commission and staff relative to the Appeal of the Planning Commission' s denial of Code Amendment No 87-15 Code Amendment No 87-15 is a request by Wilson Ford, represented by Rod Wilson of Electra-Media, to permit electronic readerboards within the City of Huntington Beach The code amendment was continued from the March 28, 1988 City Council meeting and referred to the Planning Commission for further evaluation and recommendation upon an alternative ordinance to allow electronic readerboards subject to certain criteria RECOMMENDATION Planning Commission Recommendation and Action on May 3 , 1988 The Planning Commission reviewed the suggested criteria by the Planning Commission Subcommittee, City Council and staff and took the following straw votes A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY SILVA, SECOND BY SLATES, ON A MAXIMUM SIGN HEIGHT OF 35 FEET, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE AYES Slates, Silva, Bourguignon NOES Leipzig ABSTAIN Ortega STRAW VOTE MOTION PASSED ff - / S SPI O 5/85 A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY SILVA, SECOND BY SLATES, ON A MAXIMUM SIGN AREA OF 200 SQUARE FEET, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE AYES Slates, Silva, Bourguignon NOES Ortega, Leipzig STRAW VOTE MOTION PASSED Staff was instructed to forward the following recommendations to the City Council should they approve Code Amendment No 87-15 Issue Recommendation A Entitlement for CUP & PSP with Design Review Board processing ERB and Public Works approval B Locational Limited to Beach Blvd (excluding Criteria landscape corridor portion south of Adams to Pacific Coast Highway) and parcels with freeway frontage C Min Lot Frontage 200 ft D Min distance to 150 ft residential E Min distance to 100 ft interior property line F Min distance 150 ft between ERB signs G Max # of ERB signs One per site H Max sign height 35 ft with 10 ft min ground clearance I Max sign area 200 sq ft max - (total sign area limited to twice the ERB portion) J Intensity/Glare Cylinders, shade screen and photocell for reducing intensity of lighting at night, maximum measurable light output shall not exceed 5 foot candles at the property line 01 F' RCA - 6/20/88 -2- (0740d) Issue Recommendation K Other signage In addition to the electronic on-site readerboard sign, only one monument sign (maximum 7 feet in height, 50 square feet in sign) may be permitted and all other signage shall be brought into conformance with the Sign Code L Message criteria 1 Message changes No faster than 1 message every 4 seconds 2 Min interval 1 second between messages 3 Continuous motion Not permitted 4 Light intensity Not permitted changes (other than between day and night uses M Hours of Operation 6 30 AM-10 30 PM N Public Service 10% of message time or as deemed Announcement necessary by the City for emergency conditions A MOTION WAS MADE BY SILVA, SECOND BY BOURGUIGNON, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF CODE AMENDMENT NO 87-15 TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH SUGGESTED CRITERIA, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE AYES Slates, Silva, Bourguignon NOES Leipzig, Ortega ABSENT Livengood, Higgins ABSTAIN None MOTION FAILED - PLANNING COMMISSION BY-LAWS REQUIRE A MINIMUM OF FOUR VOTES TO APPROVE OR DENY A CODE AMENDMENT A MOTION WAS MADE BY LEIPZIG, SECOND BY ORTEGA TO RECONSIDER THE FIRST MOTION FOR APPROVAL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE AYES Slates, Leipzig, Ortega, Bourguignon NOES None ABSENT Livengood, Higgins ABSTAIN Silva MOTION PASSED - (It should be noted that the Planning Commission acted to reconsider in order to provide a minimum 4 votes to allow the Code Amendment to precede back to the City Council ) RCA - 6/20/88 -3- (0740d) A MOTION WAS MADE BY SLATES, SECOND BY LEIPZIG, TO REAFFIRM PREVIOUS ACTION AND RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF CODE AMENDMENT NO 87-15, WITH FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE AYES Slates, Silva, Leipzig, Ortega NOES None ABSENT Livengood, Higgins ABSTAIN Bourguignon MOTION PASSED FINDINGS FOR DENIAL 1 Since the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, Section 961 (Sign Code) allows adequate opportunities for advertising through various types of signage, Code Amendment No 87-15 to allow electronic reader board signs is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights 2 Electronic reader board signs, if permitted by Code Amendment No 87-15, will be incompatible with surrounding existing and proposed developments, especially residential land uses 3 Electronic reader board signs, if permitted by Code Amendment No 87-15, will have the potential of creating a congestion and circulation hazard to passing motorists A MOTION WAS MADE BY SLATES, SECOND BY LEIPZIG, TO RECOMMEND SUGGESTED CRITERIA BY PLANNING COMMISSION, STAFF AND SUBCOMMITTEE, AND FORWARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO BE INCLUDED IN ORDINANCE SHOULD CODE AMENDMENT NO 87-15 BE APPROVED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE AYES Slates, Silva, Leipzig, Ortega, Bourguignon NOES None ABSENT Livengood, Higgins ABSTAIN None MOTION PASSED Staff Recommendation Staff recommendation is to uphold the original action of the Planning Commission on February 2, 1988, by denying Code Amendment No 87-15 Should the City Council choose to approve Code Amendment No 87-15, it is recommended Ordinance No 2946-B be adopted which includes criteria as suggested by staff F- C;t y RCA - 6/20/88 -4- (0740d) ANALYSIS Applicant Wilson Ford 18255 Beach Boulevard Huntington Beach, CA 92647 Location City-wide Background Code Amendment No 87-15, a request to allow electronic readerboard signage by amending the list of prohibited signs in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, was denied by the Planning Commission with findings on February 2, 1988 The Planning Commission appointed a subcommittee to further study the issue and look into the possibility of allowing electronic readerboards in return for minimizing existing signage The subcommittee met and drafted a list of possible restrictions which could be applied to electronic readerboards The City Council on March 28, 1988 (acting on an appeal of the Planning Commission' s denial) continued Code Amendment No 87-15 and two associated entitlements (Special Sign Permit No 87-18 and 87-19, requests for two freestanding signs that are 50 feet in height in lieu of 15 feet with sign area exceeding 200 square feet in size in lieu of maximum 70 square feet) , for 90 days and referred the code amendment to the Planning Commission for evaluation and recommendation upon an alternative ordinance that would allow electronic readerboards subject to certain location and design standards as recommended by the Planning Commission Subcommittee and Department of Public Work' s (see May 3, 1988 Planning Commission staff report) Also, at the City Council meeting, the Council requested further criteria for the code amendment as follows (1) Require photo cell for reducing intensity of lighting at night (2) Maximum sign area should be 200 square feet (3) All readerboard signs should conform with State regulations (CalTrans) (4) Define what arterials would be appropriate Issues Staff has polled all Orange County cities and found very few which allow electronic readerboard signage There are a few existing non-conforming signs and others which have been allowed by variance Some of these signs are located on surface streets Generally, the larger, taller signs are situated to attract freeway passers-by Staff has compiled a list of all the electronic signs in Orange County and many outside of the County along with a locational map F' RCA - 6/20/88 -5- (0740d) Staff continues to recommend denial of the proposed code amendment to allow electronic readerboard signage within the City for the reasons stated within the original RCA dated March 21, 1988 Should the City Council approve the concept of electronic readerboards, then staff has prepared an alternative ordinance for consideration The ma]or differences between staff recommended ordinance (Ordinance No 2946-B) and the Planning Commisson recommended ordinance (Ordinance No 2946-A) , if approved, is as follows Staff Planning Commission Recommendation Recommendation Issue (if approved) (if approved) Max Sign Height 15 ft 35 ft with 10 ft ground clearance Max Sign Area 70 sq ft 200 sq ft (total sign area limited to twice the electronic reader- board portion) Min Lot Frontage 400 ft 200 ft Staff ° s recommendation is designed within the framework of the existing sign code for 15 foot high signs Signs greater than 7 feet but no higher than 15 feet are permitted up to 70 square feet in size on parcels having more than 400 feet of frontage in order to provide greater separation between signs A variance would be required for signs exceeding these requirements which could then be reviewed on a case-by-case basis Special Sign Permit No 87-18 and No 87-19 are scheduled for the July 5, 1988 City Council meeting The Subcommittee Meeting comments and memorandum from Bruce Gilmer, Traffic Engineer, are attached to the May 3, 1988 Planning Commission staff report ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS The proposed pro]ect is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act FUNDING SOURCE Not applicable ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS (A) The City Council may adopt Ordinance No 2946-A as suggested by the Planning Commission with the following findings for approval, or (B) The City Council may adopt Ordinance No 2946-B as suggested by staff with the following findings of approval (f-,� RCA - 6/20/88 -6- (0740d) FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL 1 Code Amendment No 87-15 to allow electronic readerboards within the City creates additional signage opportunities 2 Code Amendment No 87-15 to allow electronic readerboards on sites abutting a freeway and Beach Boulevard, excluding the portion of Beach Boulevard designated as a landscape corridor south of Adams Avenue to Pacific Coast Highway is consistent with the Huntington Beach General Plan 3 Code Amendment No 87-15 to allow electronic readerboards sub]ect to a conditional use permit, certain design criteria and location requirements will assure compatibility with surrounding land uses 4 Message criteria as part of Code Amendment No 87-15 to permit electronic readerboards will reduce potential traffic hazards ATTACHMENTS 1 Recommended criteria if Code Amendment is approved, including a comparison of subcommittee, staff and Planning Commission recommendations 2 Draft Ordinance No 2946-A (Planning Commission recommendation, if approved) 3 Draft Ordinance No 2946-B (Staff recommendation, if approved) 4 Draft Planning Commission minutes dated May 3, 1988 5 Planning Commission staff report dated May 3 , 1988 6 RCA dated March 21, 1988 DLB SH kla 7 RCA - 6/20/88 -7- (0740d) COMPARISON MATRIX OF RECOMMENDED CRITERIA FOR ELECTRONIC READERBOARD SIGNAGE Subcommittee Staff Planning Commission Issue Recommendation Recommendation Recommendations (if approved) A Entitlement for CUP/PSP CUP & PSP with Design CUP & PSP with Design Review processing ERB Review Board and Public Board and Public Works Works approval approval B Locational Limited to major Limited to Beach Blvd Limited to Beach Blvd (exclud— Criteria arterials except PCH (except landscape ing landscape corridor portion and landscape corridors corridor) and freeway south of Adams to Pacific Coast (see Attachments 6 & 7) frontage Highway) and parcels with freeway frontage C Min Lot Frontage 200 ft Min 400 ft * 200 ft D Min distance to 150 ft 150 ft 150 ft residential E Min distance to 100 ft 100 ft 100 ft interior property line F Min distance Greater than 200 ft 150 ft 150 ft between ERB signs G Max # of ERB signs n/a One One per site H Max sign height 35 ft with 10 ft 15 ft * 35 ft with 10 ft min ground min ground clearance clearance I Max sign area 275 sq ft max — 70 sq ft * 200 sq ft max — (total sign sign area limited to area limited to twice the ERB twice the ERB portion portion) Council recommendation max 200 sq ft J Intensity/Glare Cylinders shade screen same Cylinders shade screen and and photocell for photocell for reducing intensity reducing intensity of of lighting at night maximum lighting at night measurable light output shall not exceed 5 foot candles at the property line * Consistent with current Huntington Beach sign code requirements for all types of freestanding signs **Cal Trans requirement n/a = not addressed 8 F—� Subcommittee Staff Planning Commission Issue Recommendation Recommendation Recommendations (of approved) K Other signage All signage brought into All signage brought In addition to the electronic on—site conformance max into conformance* readerboard sign only one monu— allowable wall signage ment sign (maximum 7 feet in reduced to 100 sq ft height 50 square feet in area) temporary banners per— may be permitted and all other mitted for two 15—day signage shall be brought into periods conformance with the Sign Code L Message criteria 1 Message changes No faster than 1 message Same Same every 4 seconds** 2 Min interval 1 second** Same Same between messages 3 Continuous Not permitted** Same Same motion 4 Light intensity Not permitted** Same Same changes (other than between day and night uses M Hours of Operation n /a 8 00 AM-10 00 PM 6 30 AM-10 30 PM N Public Service n/a 10/ of message time 10/ of message time or as Announcement or as deemed deemed necessary by the necessary by the City for emergency City for emergency conditions conditions * Consistent with current Huntington Beach sign code requirements for all types of freestanding signs ** CalTrans requirement n/a = not addressed _i Planning Comm Recommendation (Legislative Draft ) ORDINANCE NO - A AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AMENDING THE HUNTINGTON BEACH ORDINANCE CODE SECTIONS 9610 4, 9610 5 , 9610 9 AND 9610 10 TO ALLOW ELECTRONIC READERBOARD SIGNS The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does ordain as follows SECTION 1 Section 9610 4 (a)and (h) of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code is amended to read as follows 9610 4 Prohibited signs The following signs are prohibited within the City of Huntington Beach (a) Flashing, moving, pulsating, or intermittently lighted signs, including searchlights, except electronic readerboards and public service signs such as those for time and temperature (h) Changeable copy signs, except electronic readerboards or theatre marquees SECTION 2 Section 9610 5 (Permitted Signs-Schedule) of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code is amended to incorporate into the schedule the following specifications pertaining to electronic readerboards (b) COMMERCIAL Use of Sign Type Maximum Maximum Maximum Number Area Per Height Sign Electronic Readerboards (See Section 9610 9 (d)for specifications) 0 RqJ SECTION 3 Section 9610 9 (Miscellaneous Provisions) of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code is amended to incorporate the following (d ) Electronic Readerboards Electronic readerboards may be permitted subject to the approval of a conditional use permit by the Planning Commission, approval of a planned sign grogram according to the provisions of section 9610 6 and approval of the Design Review Board according to the provisions of Article 985 Approval of electronic readerboards shall be subiect to the following standards Permitted scans Electronic readerboards may be free standing or wall type signs The maximum number of electronic readerboards shall be one per site The maximum sign area which includes an electronic readerboard shall be two hundred (200 ) square feet The total sign area shall be limited to twice the size of the electronic readerboard portion of the sign The maximum height of an electronic readerboard shall be thirty-five (35 ) feet and shall have a minimum ground clearance of ten (10 ) feet The electronic readerboard shall have cylinders , a shade screen and a photocell for reducing the intensity of lighting at night The maximum measurable light output of the electronic readerboard shall not exceed 5-foot candles at the property line Location requirements The minimum lot frontage of the parcel shall be two hundred (200 ) feet Electronic readerboards shall be allowed only on parcels abutting a freeway and on parcels abutting Beach Boulevard, excluaina the _portion along Beach Boulevard designated as a landscape corridor south of Adams Avenue to Pacific Coast Highway The minimum distance between electronic readerboards shall be one hundred fifty (150 ) feet The minimum distance from an electronic readerboard sign to any residence shall be one hundred fifty (150 ) .feet The minimum aistance from an electronic reaaerboard to the interior property line shall be one hundred (100 ) feet_ !1 �-� - 2 - (3 ) Other standards In addition to the electronic readerboard sign, one monument sign, a maximum of seven (7 ) feet in height and a maximum of fifty (50 ) square feet in sign area, may. be permitted and all other signa_ge shall be brought into conformance with the provisions of this article The hours of operation of any electronic readerboard shall be limited to 6 30 am to 10 30 pm At least 100 of the message time, or any percentage deemed necessary by the city- for emergency conditions, shall be used for public service annoucements Messages on an electronic readerboard shall be no faster than one message every four seconds and the minimum interval between messages shall be at least one second Continuous motion of messages is not permitted Light intensity changes (other than between day and night uses ) are not permitted SECTION 4 Section 9610 10 (Definitions) of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code is amended as follows 1151 Electronic Readerboard A changeable message sign consisting of a matrix of lamps which are computer controlled XXoX L161 Flashing or animated sign A sign intermittently reflecting light, or which has any illumination which is not maintained constant in intensity, color or pattern except electronic readerboards and those for time and temperature XX01 LL71 Freestanding sign (Text unchanged ) fM IL81 Grade (Text unchanged ) XX01 ii-9i Grand opening (Text unchanged ) XM 12-01 Ground level (Text unchanged) X W 12-11 Height of sign (Text unchanged ) XZXX 1221 Indirect illumination (Text unchanged) XXXI J23J Industrial center (Text unchanged ) fW J24J Interior illumination (Text unchanged ) X/Al J25L Item of information (Text unchanged ) XW -LZ61 Land development project Text unchanged) Xz�X -C271 Monument sign Text unchanged ) - 3 - IC3' fV1 28 Logo (Text unchanged ) Xz � 29 Nameplate sign (Text unchanged) Xz�X 30 Nonconforming sign (Text unchanged) X��X 31 Open house sign (Text unchanged ) 32 Political sign (Text unchanged) 33 Pro3ecting sign (Text unchanged) X �X 34 Real estate sign (Text unchanged ) X� X12=5j= Roof sign (Text unchanged ) X �X 36 Sin (Text unchanged) 37 Sign copy (Text unchanged ) 38 Sign structure (Text unchanged ) 39 Site (Text unchanged) X �X 40 Site (street) frontage (Text unchanged) X �X 41 Subdivision directional sign (Text unchanged) X �X 42 Supergraphic (Text unchanged ) XzX 43 Temporary sign (Text unchanged ) X �X 44 Trespassing sign (Text unchanged) XX 45 Wall sign (Text unchanged ) 46 Window sign (Text unchanged ) PAGE END 4 - SECTION 5 This ordinance shall take effect thirty days after its passage PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of , 1988 Mayor ATTEST APPROVED AS TO FORM 4,� City Clerk Cbity At ry 8- 43 REVIEWED AND APPROVED ITIATED AND APPROVED City Administrator e or of Co munity evelopment be Planning Staff Recommendation (Legislative Draft ) ORDINANCE NO _ -B AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AMENDING THE HUNTINGTON BEACH ORDINANCE CODE SECTIONS 9610 4 , 9610 5 , 9610 9 AND 9610 10 TO ALLOW ELECTRONIC READERBOARD SIGNS The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does ordain as follows SECTION 1 Section 9610 4 (a)and (h) of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code is amended to read as follows 9610 4 Prohibited signs The following signs are prohibited within the City of Huntington Beach (a ) Flashing, moving, pulsating, or intermittently lighted signs, including searchlights, except electronic readerboards and public service signs such as those for time and temperature (h) Changeable copy signs, except electronic readerboards or theatre marquees SECTION 2 Section 9610 5 (Permitted Signs-Schedule) of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code is amended to incorporate into the schedule the following specifications pertaining to electronic readerboards (b) COMMERCIAL Use of Sign Type Maximum Maximum Maximum Number Area Per Height Sign Electronic Readerboards (See Section 9610 9 (d)for specifications) - 1 - SECTION 3 Section 9610 9 (Miscellaneous Provisions) of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code is amended to incorporate the following (d ) Electronic Readerboards Electronic readerboards may be permitted subject to the approval of a conditional use permit by the Planning Commission, approval of. ,a planned scan program according to the provisions of section 9610 6 and approval of the Design Review Board according to the provisions of Article 985 Approval of electronic readerboards shall be subiect to the following standards- ( 1) Permitted signs Electronic readerboards may be free standing or wall type signs The maximum number of electronic readerboards shall be one per site The maximum sign area which includes an electronic readerboard shall be seventy (70 ) square feet The total sign area shall be limited to twice the size of the electronic readerboard portion of the sign The maximum height of an electronic readerboard shall be fifteen (15 ) feet The electronic readerboard shall have cylinders , a shade screen and a_photocell for reducing the- intensity- of lighting at night The maximum measurable light output of the electronic readerboard shall not exceed 5-foot candles at the ,property line (2 ) Location requirements The minimum lot frontage of the parcel shall be four hundred (400 ) feet Electronic readerboards shall be allowed only on parcels abutting a freeway and on parcels abutting Beach Boulevard, excluding the portion along Beach Boulevard designated as a landscape corridor south of Adams Avenue to Pacific Coast Hiahwav The minimum distance between electronic readerboards shall be one hundred fifty ( 150 ) feet The minimum distance from an electronic readerboard sign to any- residence- shall be one hundred fifty ( 150 ) feet The minimum distance from an electronic readerboard to the interior property line shall be one hundred (100 ) feet F—c;L Ito Other standards In addition to the electronic readerboard sign, one monument sign, a maximum of seven (7 ) feet in height and a maximum of fifty (50 ) square feet in sign area, may be permitted and all other signage shall be brought into conformance with the provisions of this article The hours of operation of any electronic readerboard shall be limited to 6 30 am to 10 30 pm At least 10% of the message time, or any percentage deemed necessary by the city for emergency conditions , shall be used for public service annoucements Messages on an electronic readerboard shall be no faster than one message every four seconds and the minimum interval between messages shall be at least one second Continuous motion of messages is not permitted Light intensity changes (other than between day and night uses ) are not permitted SECTION 4 Section 9610 10 (Definitions) of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code is amended as follows 1151 Electronic Readerboard A changeable message sign consisting of a matrix of lamps which are computer controlled XX,9X J16j Flashing or animated sign A sign intermittently reflecting light, or which has any illumination which is not maintained constant in intensity, color or pattern, except electronic readerboards and those for time and temperature XXoX J171 Freestanding sign (Text unchanged ) XX,7X JL8J Grade (Text unchanged) XX01 IL9-1 Grand opening (Text unchanged ) fxoo U-0-1 Ground level (Text unchanged) fkoX 12-11 Height of sign (Text unchanged ) XZXX A221 Indirect illumination (Text unchanged) Mz 231 Industrial center (Text unchanged ) fkzX J241 Interior illumination (Text unchanged) XZXX -C251 Item of information (Text unchanged) fz 261 Land development pro3ect Text unchanged ) Xz01 1271 Monument sign Text unchanged ) F@o - 3 - 1171 12-8-1 Logo (Text unchanged ) XW -U-91 Nameplate sign (Text unchanged) XzoX 30 Nonconforming sign (Text unchanged ) XM 31 Open house sign (Text unchanged) XXXX 1321 Political sign (Text unchanged ) XXZX -C33i Projecting sign (Text unchanged ) XXXX _C341 Real estate sign (Text unchanged ) XXAX 13-5j Roof sign (Text unchanged) XX.zX 36a Sign (Text unchanged ) f( olX _CL7j Sign copy (Text unchanged) XX,7XIL8-1 Sign structure (Text unchanged) XXXX 39 Site (Text unchanged) XXZX 40 Site (street) frontage (Text unchanged) X �X14-11 Subdivision directional sign (Text unchanged) XXZX AA21 Supergraphic (Text unchanged) XozX _LC3i Temporary sign (Text unchanged ) XkXX JL4j Trespassing sign (Text unchanged) XO,41 -L!5i Wall sign (Text unchanged ) X �X1461 Window sign (Text unchanged) PAGE END - 4 - SECTION 5 This ordinance shall take effect thirty gays after its passage PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of 1988 I i Mayor ATTEST APPROVED AS TO FORM City Clerk C t Attorney REVIEWED AND APPROVED I ITIATED AND APPROVED City Administrator Dir for of Community evelopment be - 5 - l � AFF huntington beach department of community development Ep®R TO Planning Commission FROM Community Development DATE May 3 , 1988 SUBJECT CODE AMENDMENT NO 87-15 APPLICANT Wilson Ford 18255 Beach Boulevard Hunt Beach, CA 92647 Rod Wilson 1208 Poinsettia Avenue Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 REQUEST To amend the Sign Code, Article 961, to allow electronic readerboard signs 1 0 SUGGESTED ACTION Staff recommends the following (a) Reaffirm previous action and recommend to the City Council denial of Code Amendment No 87-15 (b) Review and recommend suggested criteria list to be included with ordinance should the City Council approve Code Amendment No 87-15 2 0 GENERAL INFORMATION Code Amendment No 87-15, a request to allow electronic readerboard signage by amending the list of prohibited signs in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, was denied by the Planning Commission with findings on February 2, 1988 The Planning Commission appointed a subcommittee to further study the issue and look into the possibility of allowing electronic readerboards in return for minimizing existing signage The subcommittee met and drafted a list of possible restrictions which could be applied to electronic readerboards The City Council on March 28, 1988 (acting on an appeal of the Planning Commission' s denial) continued the item to June 20, 1988, and referred the code amendment to the Planning Commission for evaluation and recommendation upon an alternative ordinance that would allow electronic readerboards to certain location and design standards as recommended by the Planning Commission Subcommittee (Attachment No 1) and Department of Public Work' s (Attachment No 2) Also, at the City Council meeting, the Council requested further criteria for the code amendment as followsTR,J1 -- ® , A FM 23C 0 a (1) Require photo cell for reducing intensity of lighting at night (2) Maximum sign area should be 200 square feet (3) All readerboard signs should conform with State regulations (CalTrans) (4) Define what arterials would be appropriate 3 0 ISSUES AND ANALYSIS Staff has polled all Orange County cities and found very few which allow electronic readerboard signage There are a few existing non-conforming signs and others which have been allowed by variance Some of these signs are located on surface streets Generally, the larger, taller signs are situated to attract freeway passers-by Staff has compiled a list of all the electronic signs in Orange County and many outside of the County along with a locational map In addition, a slide show ha been prepared which clearly illustrates the range of signage Huntington Beach would be open to should the proposed code amendment be approved Staff continues to recommend denial of the code amendment for the same reasons stated in previous staff reports Should the Planning Commission wish to recommend to the City Council a list of specific criteria for electronic readerboard signage for a modified code amendment, staff has included a matrix comparing the subcommittee' s recommended criteria with that of staff The matrix includes issues which, if addressed, could mitigate safety and aesthetic concerns However, approval of the proposed code amendment, even with strict criteria, would allow electronic readerboard signage which could be approved by special sign permit for signs in excess of the criteria The following is a comparison of the Planning Commission Subcommittee recommendation and staff ' s recommendation based upon surveys of other city requirements and what would be compatible within the City of Huntington Beach F—ca ,49,1 Staff Report - 5/3/88 -2- (0512d) COMPARISON MATRIX OF RECOMMENDED CRITERIA FOR ELECTRONIC READERBOARD SIGNAGE Subcommittee Staff Issue Recommendation Recommendation A Entitlement for CUP/PSP CUP & PSP with Design processing ERB Review Board and Public Works approval B Locational Limited to ma3or Limited to Beach Blvd Criteria arterials except PCH (except landscape and landscape corridors corridor) and freeway (see Attachments 6 & 7) frontage C Min Lot Frontage 200 ft Min 400 ft D Min distance to 150 ft 150 ft residential E Min distance to 100 ft 100 ft interior property line F Min distance Greater than 200 ft 150 ft between ERB signs G Max # of ERB signs n/a One per site H Max sign height 35 ft with 10 ft 15 ft min ground clearance I Max sign area 275 sq ft max - 70 sq ft sign area limited to twice the ERB portion, Council recommendation max 200 sq ft J Intensity/Glare Cylinders, shade screen same and photocell for reducing intensity of lighting at night K Other signage All signage brought into All signage brought on-site conformance, max into conformance* allowable wall signage reduced to 100 sq ft , temporary banners per- mitted for two 15-day periods * Consistent with current Huntington Beach sign code requirements for all types of freestanding signs **CalTrans requirement n/a = not addressed Staff Report - 5/3/88 -3- ('nv� 02Z(0512d) Subcommittee Staff Issue Recommendation Recommendation L Message criteria 1 Message changes No faster than 1 message Same every 4 seconds** 2 Min interval 1 second** Same between messages 3 Continuous Not permitted** Same motion 4 Light intensity Not permitted** Same changes (other than between day and night uses M Hours of Operation n /a 8 00 AM-10 00 PM N Public Service n/a 10% of message time Announcement or as deemed necessary by the City for emergency conditions * Consistent with current Huntington Beach sign code requirements for all types of freestanding signs ** CalTrans requirement n/a = not addressed 4 0 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the following (a) Reaffirm previous action and recommend to the City Council denial of Code Amendment No 87-15 (b) Review and recommend suggested criteria list to be included with ordinance should the City Council to approve Code Amendment No 87-15 —0� A,3 Staff Report - 5/3/88 -4- (0512d) ATTACHMENTS 1 Planning Commission Subcommittee recommendations presented to City Council on March 28, 1988 2 Department of Public Work' s Recommendation 3 ERB Signage Requirements by City 4 Samples of Existing Electronic Readerboards in Orange and Los Angeles Counties 5 Electronic Readerboard Signage Map 6 Map of arterials 7 Map of landscape corridors 8 City Council minutes dated March 28, 1988 9 RCA dated March 21, 1988 10 Petition in Opposition to Code Amendment No 87-15 and Special Sign Permit No 87-18 11 CalTrans Criteria Submitted by Mr Wilson SH PP kla Staff Report - 5/3/88 -5- (0512d) March 21 , 1988 Submitted to Honorable Mayor and Citv Council Submitted by Planning Commission Subcommitt( c Electrical Reader Boards Prepared by Kent M Pierce, Subcommittee Chaizman � Sub3ect Code Amendment No 87-15 STATEMENT OF ISSUE On February 2 , 1988 Planning Commission recommended denial of Code Amendment No 87-15 Several Commissioners expressed a desire to explore possible conditions whi ( l, could permit and control c lcc.tricaI r( ad(rµ board sawgn A motion carried establishing a subcotnmittc�(? to sttady the issue and mike rcronurnendit i on,, The fol lows nq m( mb(- r were appointed by the Chairman Kent M Pierce , Planning Commi -sron( r , '�ubcommitte, Chairman Victor 1e1071g , Plinntnq comma - ton C`iiarmin , m( mh- r Ken Bouquiqnon , Planning Commt -szon( r , m mbi r Rod Wilson , Electra-Media , member Eric P Weber , Resident of Pammy l an( , mr mber The Subcommi tteo met on M )-( h 1 , 1 9qP Ind st if I i s-,u4 3 minutes Subseduc nt 1 y srvet i t members had s( cond t hounhl- or additional input A second Subcomm i t t F( mept i nq day, held with all members present on March 15 , 1988 RECOMMENDATIONS The following report/recommendations from the subcommiLtc ( were the result of mutual consent of the ahole , BUT tvLRF NOT PRESENTED TO, DISCUSSED, NOR APPROVED BY THE PLANNIN(, COMMISSION General Findings It could be q!EI rimcntal to businesses located in Huntington Beach n_o_t 1 g r2ermit_ signaq( (und( r` _ct_rtct controls) incorporating the new technology--and still emerging t( chnology--of el -ctrir rrid( r hoard signs that ar( permitted in oth( r jurisdt ( tions Ih( 5ubcommitt( ( felt that by insisting on the following ( onditions for allowing el�_ctrtr r d r bnar(' that Lh( curr nt -, 1qn blightage on Beach BlvO dnd other major artsris1s tith r, the city would be vastly improver] upon--as well as protecting the (environment of adjo-( nL r( stdent 1 � the sign coda of the City of Huntington Beach may permit electrical reader board signs subject to the following pccific conditions i Obtaininq a Conditional Use Permit and approval of a Planntd Sign Program 2 Maximum sign height limited to 35 feet with not less titan 10 feet ground clearance 3 Cylinders and shade screens shall be required to minima zc gl arc 4 Minimum separation between reader board to residential property of 150 fcct a Minimum lot frontage of 200 feet rcquircd Sign shall be located a minimum of 100 feet from the property line i -Maximum sign area limited to twice the electrical rc rdt r board portion , not to c xceed 276 sq ft total ( int lt des reade- boas d and other signage) h Tic ipprovtd Plan Sign Proqram hall provide all other signs on site shall be brought into conformance with sign codc including tnt number of signs No freestanding signs -hall be iliowred in addition to reader board sign except on( 1 foot high monument sign Reduce ma,cimum allowable wall signaqc to 100 sq £ t and ciiminatc opportunity to nave balloons, banners , and other temporary signage A xcept that balloons , banners , and other temporary signaqc may be pc rmittc d for up to two f iftcen day periods) Also that if parkinq lot lighting spills onto a 0ar-« nt resi cac dt ia) prcDe-t ies, it Shall be hooded to prevent intrusion into adjacent residential properties 7 Electrical reader board signs shall be limited to major arterials with the exception of Pacific Coast Highway, a scenic highway and existing landscape corridors ADDI I I GNAT RECOMME NDAI I GNS Ih subcommittee felt strongly that whatever the decision icgardinq electrical reader board signs the following code imt ndMk nt snould be made l Whcnevcr a building pormif is issued that would add more than 10o t- tht square footage of existing improVcmcnts, tnit a Plan Sign Program shall be approved to taring c xisting signaqc cep to current code the above coupled with a stionq enforcement policy of the cxistinq sign codt � will qo a long way to end sign blliq}stage a / I � P( APRIL 28 , 1988 TO PAN POSTEN FROM BRUCE H GILMEP SUBJECT CHANGEABLE MESSAGE SIGNS AFTER REVIEW OF THE MATERIALS FORWARDED AND FIELD REVIEW OF SIMILAR INSTALLATIONS ELSEWHERE , THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS SEEM APPROPRIATE 1 THE ITEMS IN THE FIRST MEMORANDUM STILL PERTAIN 2 TF-E SUBJECT OF "GLARE" FROM THE DRIVER ' S VIEWPOINT SHOULD HAVE SUBSTANTIAL CONSIDERATION SPECIFICALLY , A MEASURABLE MAXIMUM LIGHT OUTPUT E 6 , 5 FOOTCANDLES , SHOULD BE INCORPORATED INTO ANY REGULATION ADOPTED FOR THESE DEVICES 3 THE TECHNICAL ABILITY TO ACCESS THE PUBLIC SERVICE MESSAGES IN "REAL TIME" , I E DISPLAY MESSAGES WHENEVER THE NEED IS PRESENT , SHOULD BE DEMONSTRATED AND PART OF THE REGULATIONS IMPOSED ON THE DEVISES INSTALLED PLEASE DON ' T HESITATE TO CONTACT ME IF I CAN BE OF ANY ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE cc LES EVANS JAMAL RAHIMI zY OF X 6 "]• _ y'4 i w� 1r+yS �v J __• i- V�f - Y �'� `Yt -.. - _4.-• JJ t T,lY aT � - OE _INTER DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION - K HUNTBVGTON BEACH x/e� To Pam Posten From Bruce Gilmer Planning Public Works Subject Illuminated Signs Date January 27, 1988 Changeable Messages In response to the submittal for a code amendment pertaining to the installation of changeable message electronic illuminated signs, the following comments are submitted for use in considera- tion of the amendment 14 From a traffic safety perspective, certain common sense restric- tions must be placed on such installations These res7trktions snould address concerns regarding the following general categories 1 Animation - designed to catch the viewers attention 2 Duration of Message - affording the viewer adequate time to absorb the text of the message 3 Between Message Interval - indicating a change 4 Intensity of Illumination - primarily a night time concern regarding distracting or blinding glare Each of these categories present a potential for removing the drivers attention from the roadway Each should therefore be tt1e subject of the proposed code modification to provide the - appropriate minimum or maximum value allowed, e g the message shall not be displayed for a period of time less than five ( 5) seconds As we have discussed, other /agencies have developed codes and guidelines pertaining to these signs Using the experience of those agencies, adoption of the appropriate sections of those =_ codes for our situation on arterial highways would seem to be useful I will be available to review any section(s) you would _ propose, if such a- review is needed BHG lw cc Les Evans Jamal Rahimi �:. ,_ .�r.�..-:�.�'sF�A,+ �'.,kF xr>#,� Y��+� t•...'^ w•�,-, "Lv'�'. ,s , r ,,,� 1 }•,,.,...,y.. = ..i�'Y r�`,z i. 's .%'�an ^.ti"��+ � ..tr �� d /s'0( r 'r �ls1t -r��4�.Mt'Y A.��,�r£..�sr.+C t*�✓Y�' . --.. r .i'0. `« .n � u� � ���4� " ELECTRONIC READERBOARD SIGNAGE REQUIREMENTS BY CITY ORANGE COUNTY ERB Signs Prohibited How ERB City by Code Existing Signs Sign Permitted Anaheim No Anaheim Toyota Building Travel Lodge permits Pac-Tel Anaheim Hilton Anaheim Convention Center Embassy Suites Brea Yes None Buena Park Yes House of Imports Variance Costa Mesa Yes Harbor Plaza Planned Sign Program Fairgrounds Not under City 3urisdiction Cypress Yes None City Council Fountain Yes None --- Valley Fullerton No None CUP Garden Grove Yes Orange County Volvo Approved with condition 1 message change/ 24 hour period Irvine Yes None --- Laguna Beach Yes None Design Review Board La Habra Yes None Variance/CUP La Palma Yes None City Council Los Alamitos Yes None Planned Sign Program Newport Beach No None --- Orange No Rehabilitation Institute Design Review Board Placentia Yes None Variance �`-�? �9 3 ELECTRONIC READERBOARD SIGNAGE REQUIREMENTS BY CITY (Continued) ERB Signs Prohibited How ERB City by Code Existing Signs Sign Permitted San Clemente Yes None Variance San Juan Yes None --- Capistrano Santa Ana Yes Santa Ana Auto Center Variance (Redevelopment Area) Seal Beach Yes None --- Stanton Yes None Variance Tustin Yes None --- Villa Park --- None --- Westminster Yes Centennial Thrift & Loan Variance Sunset Ford Variance Yorba Linda Yes None Variance OUTSIDE ORANGE COUNTY ERB Signs Prohibited How ERB City by Code Existing Signs Sign Permitted Arcadia Yes None --- Carson No Cormier Chevrolet Variance ITT Building Permit Carson Civic Center Exempt Compton Yes Auto Mall Redevelopment Area Downey Yes Embassy Suites Public Service Sign Duarte No Duarte Toyota Architectural Duarte Suzuki Board approval La Mirada Yes Gateway Plaza Redevelopment Agency F-9 30 '3 e ELECTRONIC READERBOARD SIGNAGE REQUIREMENTS BY CITY (Continued) OUTSIDE ORANGE COUNTY ERB Signs Prohibited How ERB City by Code Existing Signs Sign Permitted Long Beach Long Beach Convention Center Monrovia Yes Auto Mall Variance Norwalk Yes Norwalk Toyota Sign Use Permit Ramada Inn (Variance) Pasadena No Pasadena Civic Center Building permit Hastings Ranch Shopping Nonconforming Center Santa Fe No, but Santa Fe Springs Plaza City-funded limited to project 10 acre sites South Gate No Pete Ellis Dodge Non-conforming Jeep/Eagle L SAMPLES OF EXISTING ELECTRONIC READERBOARDS IN ORANGE AND LOS ANGELES COUNTIES Size of Lines of Electronic Approximate Electronic Business Location Box Height Copy Centennial Thrift NEC Beach and 3 ' x 20 ' = 30 ' -35 ' 1 & Loan Westminster 60 sq ft (Westminster) Sunset Ford* S of Garden 7' x 35 ' 60 ' 3 Grove Blvd 245 sq ft (west of Edwards) (Westminster) Orange County 10120 Garden 6 ' x 25 ' = 35 ' 3 Volvo Grove Blvd 125 sq ft SWC (Garden Grove Blvd and Brookhurst) (Garden Grove) Gateway Plaza* Valley View off 8 ' x 15 ' 50 ' 3 5 Freeway 120 sq ft (La Mirada) House of Imports* 6862 Manchester 8 ' x 25 ' 30 ' 3 Beach Boulevard 200 sq ft and 5 Freeway (Buena Park) Santa Fe Springs Off 605 Fwy 8 ' x 25 ' 45 ' 3 Shopping Center on Telegraph 200 sq ft (Santa Fe Springs) Norwalk Toyota 11530 Firestone 6 ' x 25 ' 40 ' 2 Blvd (Norwalk) 150 sq ft Ramada Inn* 14299 Firestone 8 ' x 30 ' 93 ' 3 Boulevard off 240 sq ft 5 Freeway (Norwalk) *Freeway visibility /-f CA- -a Size of Lines of Electronic Approximate Electronic Business Location Box Height Copy Embassy Suites 8425 Firestone 6 ' x 18 ' 35 '-40 ' 3 Blvd (Downey) 108 sq ft Pete Ellis Dodge 5800 Firestone 5 ' x 25 ' 55 ' 3 Jeep/Eagle Blvd (Firestone 125 sq ft exit off Long Beach Freeway) (South Gate) Cormier Chevrolet* Wilmington @ 8 ' x 25 ' 110 ' 3 405 Freeway 200 sq ft (Carson) ITT* Wilmington @ 4 ' x 18 ' 45 ' 3 405 Freeway 72 sq ft (Carson) Carson Civic 701 E Carson 6 ' x 18 ' 15 ' 3 Center (Carson) 108 sq ft Monument Anaheim Toyota* 1601 S Anaheim 8 ' x 25 ' 50 ' 3 Blvd (Harbor 200 sq ft exit off 5 Freeway) (Anaheim) Travel Lodge* 1221 S Harbor 6 ' x 18 ' 30 ' 3 Blvd (Harbor 108 sq ft exit off 5 Freeway) (Anaheim) Pac-Tel* (Harbor exit 5 'x 21 ' 30 ' 2 off 5 Freeway) 105 sq ft (Anaheim) Anaheim Hilton 777 West 6 ' x 18 ' 25 ' -30 ' 3 Convention Way 108 sq ft (Katella/Harbor) (Anaheim) Anaheim Convention 800 W Katella 6 ' x 25 ' 35 ' -40 ' 3 Center (Katella/Harbor) 150 sq ft (Anaheim) Embassy Suite* Glassel off 6 ' x 18 ' 50 ' -60 ' 3 91 Freeway 108 sq ft *Freeway visibility ��� 33 Size of Lines of Electronic Approximate Electronic Business Location Box Height Copy Santa Ana Auto (Edinger Exit 5 ' x 17 ' 60 ' 3 Center* off 55 Freeway) 85 sq ft (Santa Ana) Orange County Fairgrounds* Fair/55 Freeway 5 ' x 20 ' 20 ' 2 (Costa Mesa) 100 sq ft Harbor Plaza 2300 Harbor 5 ' x 20 ' 30 ' 1 Boulevard 100 sq ft (Harbor/Wilson) (Costa Mesa) Compton Auto* Harbor Freeway 10 ' x 36 ' 85 ' 3 Plaza @ Artesia 360 sq ft (Compton) Pasadena Civic 300 E Green 6 ' x 16 ' 15 ' 2 Center (Public (Green and Los 96 sq ft Monument Service Robles) Announcements (Pasadena) Hastings Ranch Rosemead/ 3 ' x 25 ' 40 ' 1 Shopping Center Foothill 75 sq ft (Pasadena) Duarte Toyota* (Buena Vista 7 ' x 36 ' 55 ' 3 Exit off 210 252 sq ft Freeway) (Duarte) Duarte Suzuki* (Buena Vista 7 ' x 30 ' 55 ' 3 Exit off 210 210 sq ft Freeway) (Duarte) Rehabilitation 1800 E LaVeta 9 ' x 1' 30 ' 1 Institute (Tustin Blvd 9 sq ft north of 22 Freeway) (Orange) *Freeway visibility 34 /� _ _ lC � � Size of Lines of Electronic Approximate Electronic Business Location Box Height Copy Long Beach 300 E Ocean n/a n/a n/a Convention Center Blvd (Long Beach) *Freeway visibility 35 FER N G S W s T 0 r Sw P L.C.can F m l L C a Pot + Mn A de fl8 I Sw S E E- PAS DE o M E MON O A BUR S (J A C A E A2USA 0 GLENDOPA C C Esp SA � M O 3 H TEM E RW E DM S CL flEMO S N CI Y weo P.k PASAQ G L L ERNE BE ER +° AEHMBA ALOW N COV NA Ba S tI OSEMEAD EL ra` 1 MON E 8 woo WO w l EST ANUFL S MP RKRE O EL ! / Mp EOMON / 0 / L WALNU TE S N �UC MONT BELLO Q MO C VE NON IINDUS 1 Di \ 7� 19, ME WOO / H TON W � CO H ht M A LL 1 ER WH E p O R G EWO { GA OF S 7 C BE AH na yy { SOUT / 9 NS E GS _ LOS ANGELES CO —LI ILLY G D E LA L W S GUN O W O NE B EA O WAL \'9O MPT I M AGA P MO T} YLO BOA \� M N A ..L W D � OW \ C l y G I! k' F L "ON P C NT A A w oa HE MOS } T S P E B C $ W O CERR OIS r TO R NCE aI -('sue I E M IM R O OO BEAC O v Wp AS T VL A PA K A MITO ANTON CG E S M �l r— 3 }R GE M Es o W k S GR E O 7 /' �\ b W NA _STN ISE BE �X,- s \ A LE HUNTINGTON BEACH Rv E O ME tv R s2i NEWPO l� B C ELECTRONIC DEADER DGAPD S I GNAGE � HUNTINGTON BEACH C4LIFORNIK Signs with freeway visibility rmPLANNING DIVISION Signs located on surface streets tip'*e All to �`ENTS CIRCULATION PLAN OF ARTERIAL T STREETS AND HIGHWAYS � . w ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL I RESOLUTION NO 4368 DEC 12 1976 LEGEND - - FREEWAY STREET CAPACITY e 3 MAJOR 45000 d � {) l PRIMARY 30000 1 �— -- 4—-- - --— SECONDARY 20000 t NOTE SOLID LINES INDICATE EA ST NG RIGHT OF WAY I NOT NECESSARILY ULTIMATE R}i 9F WAY DASHED LINES NOCATE AREAS WHERE NO 3 Ja PIGHT OF WAY EAIS S s , I ® I I A ®mv �/ -- -- ----+— / I I / I I I CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ORANGE COUNTY CALIFORNIA J I Figure 3-6 { F -- 57 e_ a � 4 b�F twvN \ Iy�yMnMl IyM41oY Figure 3-8 Afftk sm LANDSCAPE CORRIDORS ntin ton beach planning department MINUTES REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Council Chamber, Civic Center Huntington Beach, California Monday, March 28, 1988 A tape recording of this meeting is on file in the City Clerk's Office Chairman Erskine called the regular meeting of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach to order at 7 p m AGENCY L CALL Present Kelly, Green, Finley, Erskine, Mays, Winchell , Bannister Absent None JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Chairman Erskine announced that a joint meeting of the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency had been called COUNCIL ROLL CALL Present Kelly, Green, Finley, Erskine, Mays, Winchell , Bannister Absent None P B OMMENT Dave h suggested that the old Civic Center site (Townsquare) be utilized for undergro parking with a park on top He informed Council he had gath- ered approximat 315 opinions during an informal survey that were over- whelmingly in favo f a park, rather than condominiums on that site Barbara Mil.kovich and and Watkin urged Council to preserve the Little Blue Church and relocate it Councilman/Director Banni e room (City Council) PUBLIC HEARING - APPEAL TO PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF CODE AMENDMENT 87-15 - REFERRED TO PLANNING COMMISSION WITH DIRECTION - ROD WILSON ELECTRA MEDIA ON BEHALF OF WILSON FOR The Mayor announced that this was the day and hour set for a public hearing continued open from March 21 , 1988, to consider an appeal filed by Rod Wilson, 39 Page 2 — Redevelopment Agency Minutes — 3/28/88 Electra Media, on behalf of Wilson Ford to the Planning Commission' s denial of Code Amendment No 87-15 which would amend Article 961 (Sign Code) of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code to allow electronic reader boards Scott Hess, Associate Planner, presented a staff report Kent Pierce, representing the Planning Commission Sub—Committee, appointed to explore the possibility of the Code Amendment, reviewed their findings He stated he believed the proposed Code Amendment would result in the clean—up of existing signs on Beach Boulevard He recommended various conditions to be placed on electronic readerboards, that such signs be limited to certain arterial streets and that the present code be strongly enforced Rick Evans, Vice President of Huntington Jeep Eagle, described the competition between automobile dealers and described auto malls in other cities He stated that his company is civic minded and mentioned youth organizations and community events which the company sponsors He stated the company would pledge ten per cent of the message time for service messages, possibly emer— gency road information, at the discretion of the City Council Rod Wilson, representing Electra Media, stated that Wilson Ford and the AMC Company contracted with Electra Media to buy an electronic sign to compete with the competition of other automobile dealers in neighboring cities that have electronic signs He stated that he had distributed to Council a fact sheet report addressing Planning Commission and staff's concerns He reviewed the fact sheet -and showed Council a lamp cylinder and explained that its func— tion was to mitigate glare and halo effect from the sign He showed Council a shade screen that would cut down on glare and spillage He stated that the display contained a photo cell and would dim automatically at night Roy Moosa and Eric Weber stated their opposition to proposed code amendment 87-15 There being no one present to speak further on the matter and there being no further protests filed, either oral or written, the hearing was closed by the Mayor Following discussion, a motion was made by Winchell , seconded by Erskine, to uphold the Planning Commission and deny Code Amendment 87-15 with findings for denial as set forth in the RCA dated March 21 , 1988 Following discussion, the motion was withdrawn Following discussion, a motion was made by Winchell , seconded Erskine, to refer Code Amendment 87-15 to the Planning Commission for evaluation and recommendation upon an alternative ordinance that would allow electronic read— erboards subject to certain location and design standards numbers 1 through 8, as recommended by the Planning Commission Subcommittee and Department of Pub— lic Works in their "Minutes of Subcommittee Meeting on Electrical Reader Boards Tuesday, March 1 , 1988", adding #9 defining major arterials and where they appear, modifying #5 to read "Maximum sign area limited to 200 square feet ", and requiring photo cells to dim the sign at dusk The motion car— ried by the following roll call vote AYES Green, Finley, Erskine, Mays, Winchell NOES Kelly ABSENT Bannister (out of the room) 4 b .� Page 3 - Redevelopment Agency Minutes - 3/28/88 W tY Counci 1 P A IC HEARING �H C FIN ED _PEN FOR 90 DAYS WITH READVERTISEMENT - APPE,AL �'0 PLANNINGCOMMISSION DENIAL OF SPECIAL SIGN PERMIT 87-18 - ROD WILSON ELECTRA MEDIA The Mayor announced that this was the day and hour set for a public hearing continued open from March 21 , 1988, to consider an appeal filed by Rod Wilson, Electra Media, to the Planning Commission' s denial of Special Sign Permit 87-18 which would allow an electronic reader board sign at a height of 50 feet in lieu of 15 feet with an area of 400 square feet in lieu of 70 square feet the proposed sign would be in excess of total number of signs allowed for the project He stated that Council had been provided with copies of two peti- tions which had been submitted to the Planning Commission listing approxi- mately 75 signatures opposed to Special Sign Permit 87-18 included The property is located at 18255 Beach Boulevard (on the west side of Beach Boulevard, south of Taylor Drive - Wilson Ford) in the C-2 (Commercial Dis- trict) Rod Wilson requested a continuance of the matter for ninety days There being no one present to speak further on the matter and there being no further protests filed, either oral or written, the hearing was closed by the Mayor A motion was made by Mays, seconded by Kelly, to continue the public hearing open, with readvertisement, for ninety days to consider Special Sign Permit 87-18 based on findings for denial as set forth in the RCA dated March 21 , 1988 The motion carried by the following roll call vote AYES Kelly, Green, Finley, Erskine, Mays, Winchell NOES None ABSENT Bannister (out of the room) fCi y CounCll) PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED OPEN FOR 90 DAYS WITH READVERTISE- MENTAPPEAL TO PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF SPECIAL SIGN PERMIT 87-19 - ROD WIL,SON ELECTRA MEDIA The Mayor announced that this was the day and hour set for a public hearing continued open from March 21 , 1988, to consider an appeal filed by Rod Wilson, Electra Media, to the Planning Commission's denial of Special Sign Permit 87-19 which would allow an electronic reader board sign at a height of 50 feet in lieu of 15 feet with an area of 400 square feet in lieu of 70 square feet The proposed sign would be in excess of total number of signs allowed for the project The property is located at 16751 Beach Boulevard (west side of Beach Boulevard north of Terry Drive - Huntington AMC) Rod Wilson requested that the issue be continued for ninety days There being no one present to speak further on the matter and there being no further protests filed, either oral or written, the hearing was closed by the ° Mayor Page 4 - Redevelopment Agency Minutes - 3/28/88 A motion was made by Finley, seconded by Mays, to continue the public hearing open, with readvertisement, for ninety days to consider Special Sign Permit 87-19 based on findings set forth in the RCA dated March 21 , 1988 The motion carried by the following roll call vote AYES Kelly, Green, Finley, Erskine, Mays , Winchell NOES None ABSENT Bannister (out of the room) Bnn1_5_tqr _r1tWr0gd tof rom - .ADDPM__- ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY BY EMINENT AP 2 4 - 2 AND AP 24-14 -17 - EDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA The Mayor a ounced that this was the day and hour set for a public hearing to consider Res ution No 5860 - "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH DECLARIN THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY REQUIRE ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN REAL PR ERTY IN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH FOR PUBLIC PURPOSES, AND AUTHORIZING THE CQUISITION OF SUCH PROPERTY BY EMINENT D014AIN Be (Property located on Olive b tween 5th and Main) The Deputy City Cler announced that all legal requirements for notification, and posting had been et, and that she had received a communication from Jim Koller regarding the ma ter The City Administrator pr ented a staff report Doug LaBelle, Deputy City A inistrator, Community Development, stated for the record "The matter before a City this evening in the five actions for your consideration, five separate dministrative hearings, are city hearings on resolutions of necessity relat a to the acquisition of property for parking facilities to be constructed in he second and third blocks of Main Street The hearing this evening is for he owners of the real property in question only Not a part of the considerat n this evening is the question of compen- sation since that subject is for t courts to ultimately decide at a later date should you adopt the resolutio s of necessity The noticed hearings relate to the issues of the public int est and necessity, the greatest public good and least private injury and the n cessity for the proposed project in question "I have some general comments that I would 1 e to make relative to the matter that will apply to the five separate hearing that will be conducted follow- ing this The five acquisitions in question ar needed for parking to be pro- vided in the downtown area public parking For ublic facilities to be con- structed both in the second block of Main Stre , bounded by Main, Third, Walnut and Olive, and in the third block of Main Street bounded by Main, Orange, Olive and 5th Street In terms of the parks in our analysis, the areas selected provide for a natural progression of rking in areas where surface parking presently exists Clearly the need is there and the least impact will be suffered as a part of the acquisition of the properties " The Mayor opened the public hearing and stated that the law re Tres that only owners or their designated representatives , i e an attorney or ther agent of 4,' 4 C-01. REQUEt FOR CITY C®UNCIOACTI N Date March 21, 1988 Submitted to Honorable Mayor and City Council Submitted by Paul Cook, City Administrator Prepared by Douglas N La Belle, Director, Community Development Subject APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION° S DENIAL OF CODE AMENDMENT NO 87-15 Consistent with Council Policy? [ ] Yes X New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue Recommendation Analysis Funding Source Alternative Actions Attachments i1� STATEMENT OF ISSUE Code Amendment No 87-15 is a request by the applicant to allow electronic reader boards by amending the list of prohibited signs in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, Section 9610 4 (a)&(h) to exclude readerboards This request is in con3unction with two requests for special sign permits (Special Sign Permit No 87-18 and 87-19) for auto dealer signs along Beach Boulevard at a height of 50 feet in lieu of 15 feet with 200 square foot electronic reader boards (8 feet by 25 feet) The total sign area proposed is 254 square feet RECOMMENDATION Planning Commission Recommendation and Action on February 2 , 1988 ON MOTION BY SCHUMACHER AND SECOND BY HIGGINS, CODE AMENDMENT NO 87-15 WAS DENIED WITH FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE AYES Pierce, Livengood, Silva, Leipzig, Schumacher, Higgins NOES Bourguignon ABSENT None ABSTAIN None FINDINGS FOR DENIAL 1 Since the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, Section 961 (Sign Code) allows adequate opportunities for advertising through various types of signage, Code Amendment No 87-15 to allow electronic reader board signs is not necessary for the preservation and en]oyment of substantial property rights 2 Electronic reader board signs, if permitted by Code Amendment No 87-15, will be incompatible with surrounding existing and proposed developments, especially residential land uses of PIO 4/84 3 Electronic reader board signs, if permitted by Code Amendment No 87-15, will have the potential of creating a congestion and circulation hazard to passing motorists Staff recommendaton is the same as the Planning Commission ANALYSIS Applicant Wilson Ford 18255 Beach Boulevard Huntington Beach, CA 92647 Location City-wide DISCUSSION Code Amendment No 87-15 to amend Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, Section 9610 4, is being requested by the applicant to enable two requests to be acted upon for special sign permits for electronic reader boards in excess of sign code requirements (height, area and location criteria) The City Attorney' s office has indicated that a special sign permit may be granted for deviations to the maximum standards for signs but not to allow a sign (electronic reader board) that is expressly prohibited by ordinance (Section 9610 4) as stated in Section 9610 7 as follows "A special sign permit cannot be processed for those signs listed as prohibited in Section 9610 4" Section 9610 4 - Prohibited Signs includes (a) Flashing, moving, pulsating, or intermittently lighted signs, including searchlights, except public service signs such as those for time and temperature (h) Changeable copy signs, including electronic readerboards, except theatre marquees The electronic reader boards proposed are approximately 8 feet by 25 feet (200 square feet) containing multiple lamps within a black background (see attachment) They are computer controlled with the capability to generate multiple messages and characters The Huntington Beach Sign Code recently underwent extensive review and amendment by the City Council, with input from the Planning Commission, Chamber of Commerce and other business and citizen groups At that time a close look was taken at the signage on Beach Boulevard The intent of the revised ordinance was to limit sign heights, reduce visual clutter and create a more aesthetically pleasing appearance to passing motorists In reviewing the sign regulations for Beach Boulevard, it is important to note that many (;� q4 RCA - 3/21/88 -2- (0164d) of the changes relate to the increasing urban character of the street scene With more development, the taller signs are not as visible A sign within a motorists ' direct cone of vision is going to be more readily seen and read With today' s smaller cars, too, the view through the windshield often cuts off the higher signs so that all that can be seen is the support pole In the past, the freestanding signs of 50 to 60 feet were erected to attract motorists from miles away, but today' s urban development is far too cluttered to allow for any effective communication of a message at this distance Approval of electronic reader boards with changing messages will increase the visual clutter rather than reduce it Staff surveyed other cities in the Orange County and Los Angeles County areas and found electronic reader boards to be generally prohibited Jurisdictions whose ordinances expressly prohibit them include Costa Mesa, Garden Grove, Irvine, Westminster, Orange, Buena Park, Compton, Pasadena, Arcadia, Stanton, Monrovia and the County of Orange Four cities were found to have one or more electronic reader boards, most of which were allowed through a variance (or similar review) procedure Carson, the only city with an ordinance which allows electronic reader boards, has specific requirements for this type of sign A commonality of all existing electronic reader board signs investigated by staff is their proximity to a freeway with definite freeway visibility Staff recommends that electronic reader boards not be allowed in Huntington Beach (especially on Beach Boulevard) due to the risk of hazardous distraction of motorists It is recommended that the use of flashing, blinking, pulsating or intermittently lighted signage be reserved for public safety and driving messages to motorists The use of flashing signage for advertising is visually demanding and may be confusing to drivers These signs will increase the risk of hazards and may cause a slowing of traffic on arterial roadways such as Beach Boulevard The traffic division of Public Works has reviewed the request and recommends restrictions be placed on such signage if approved to prevent them from being distractions to motorists (see Attachment No 2 of the Planning Commission staff report) The Planning Commission denied the code amendment request due to concerns over increasing the visual clutter on Beach Boulevard and possibly throughout the City, impacting ad]acent residents with light and glare from the large signs and allowing possible distractions to motorists After their action, the Planning Commission appointed a subcommittee to further study the issue They saw the possibility of allowing electronic readerboards in return for minimizing existing signage The subcommittee met and drafted a list of possible restrictions which could be placed on electronic readerboards should the Council wish to approve the code amendment Their comments are forthcoming RCA - 3/21/88 -3- (0164d) ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS The proposed project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act FUNDING SOURCE Not applicable ALTERNATIVE ACTION The City Council may refer Code Amendment No 87-15 to the Planning Commission for evaluation and recommendation upon an alternative Ordinance that would allow electronic readerboards subject to certain location and design standards as recommended by the Planning Commission Subcommittee and Department of Public Works (Attachment No 2 of Planning Commission staff report dated February 2, 1988) ATTACHMENTS 1 Appeal letter dated February 12, 1988 2 Planning Commission staff report dated February 2, 1988 5 Minutes - Subcommittee Meeting On Electrical Reader Boards - 3/1/88 DNL PP kla RCA - 3/21/88 -4- (0164d) MINUTES SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING ON ELECTRICAL READER BOARDS TUESDAY, MARCH 1, 1988 Committee Members Present Kent Pierce, Ken Bouguignon, Rod Wilson, Eric Weber Victor Leipzig (attended last portion of meeting) Staff Present Pam Posten, Scott Hess The Committee met and discussed allowing electrical readerboard signs in the City sub]ect to specific criteria Following is some suggested criteria 1 Maximum sign height limited to 40 feet with not less than 10 feet ground clearance 2 Cylinders and shade screens shall be required to minimize glare 3 Minimum separation between readerboard to residential property of 150 feet 4 Minimum lot frontage of 200 feet required Sign shall be located a minimum of 100 feet from the property line 5 Maximum sign area limited to 275 square feet (includes readerboard and other signage) 6 Reduce maximum allowable wall signage to 100 square feet 7 All other signs on site shall be brought into conformance with sign code including the number of signs No freestanding signs allowed in addition to reader board sign except one 7 foot high monument sign 8 Eliminate opportunity to have balloons, banners, and other temporary signage PP sds 0177d �r� 1 1208 Poinsettia Ave / Manhattan Beach CA 90266 / 213 379 5149 --,2 �s1 c3 r 4 IQ ���'/)l/{' r��,t, r/�',,��L � `���?�c� (�! �"r j y �c�r�jf� �t L_ �G�1•j�/t!r G 7v 7#C C'l C Ce���e / G- E 4 ti P UNTINGTON BEACH /U OFVELOPNENT SERVICES Authonzea Dealer For P 0 Box 190 Mtn' - — Beach CA 9264¢ oaKraowas Electronic Visual g "c Information Systems �� huntington beach department of community development STAf f I Ep®R TO Planning Commission FROM Community Development DATE February 2, 1988 SUBJECT CODE AMENDMENT NO 87-15 APPLICANT Wilson Ford DATE ACCEPTED 18255 Beach Boulevard January 22, 1988 Hunt Beach, CA 92647 MANDATORY PROCESSING DATE REQUEST To amend the sign March 22, 1988 ordinance Article 961 to allow electronic reader boards 1 .0 SUGGESTED ACTION Deny Code Amendment No 87-15 with findings 2 0 GENERAL INFORMATION Code Amendment No 87-15 is a request by the applicant to allow electronic reader boards by excluding such signs from the list of prohibited signs in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, Section 9610 4(a)&(h) This request is in conjunction with two requests for special sign permits (Special Sign Permit No 87-18 and 87-19) for auto dealer signs along Beach Boulevard at a height of 50 feet with 400 square foot electronic reader boards (8 feet by 25 feet) 3 0 ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS The proposed project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act 4 0 COASTAL STATUS Not applicable 5. 0 REDEVELOPMENT STATUS Not applicable 6 0 SPECIFIC PLAN Not applicable 7 0 SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE Not applicable F`X 4 -1 A FM 23C 8 . 0 ANALYSIS Code Amendment No 87-15 to amend Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, Section 9610 4, is being requested by the applicant to enable two requests for special sign permits for electronic reader boards in excess of sign code requirements (height, area and location criteria) The City Attorney' s office has indicated that a special sign permit may be granted for deviations to the maximum standards for signs but not to allow a sign (electronic reader board) that is expressly prohibited by ordinance (Section 9610 4) as stated in Section 9610 7 The electronic reader boards proposed are approximately 8 feet by 25 feet (400 square feet) containing multiple lamps within a black background (see attachment) They are computer controlled with the capability to generate multiple messages and characters The Huntington Beach Sign Code recently underwent extensive review and amendment by the City Council, with input from the Planning Commission, Chamber of Commerce and other business and citizen groups At that time a close look was taken at the signage on Beach Boulevard The intent of the revised ordinance was to limit sign heights, reduce visual clutter and create a more aesthetically pleasing appearance to passing motorists In reviewing the sign regulations for Beach Boulevard, it is important to note that many of the changes relate to the increasing urban character of the street scene With more development, the taller signs are not as visible A sign within a motorists ' direct cone of vision is going to be more readily seen and read With today' s smaller cars, too, the view through the windshield often cuts off the higher signs so that all that can be seen is the support pole In the past, the freestanding signs of 50 to 60 feet were erected to attract motorists from miles away, but today' s urban development is far too cluttered to allow for any effective communication of a message at this distance Approval of electronic reader boards with changing messages will increase the visual clutter rather than reduce it Staff surveyed other cities in the Orange County and Los Angeles County areas and found electronic reader boards to be generally prohibited Jurisdictions whose ordinances expressly prohibit them include Costa Mesa, Garden Grove, Irvine, Westminster, Orange, Buena Park, Compton, Pasadena, Arcadia, Stanton, Monrovia and the County of Orange Four cities were found to have one or more electronic reader boards, most of which were allowed through a variance (or similar review) procedure Carson, the only city with an ordinance which allows electronic reader boards, has specific requirements for this type of sign A commonality of all existing electronic reader board signs investigated by staff is their proximity to a freeway with definite freeway visibility Staff Report - 2/2/88 -2- (9940d) 4 Staff recommends that electronic reader boards not be allowed in Huntington Beach (especially on Beach Boulevard) due to the risk of hazardous distraction of motorists It is also recommendedithat the use of flashing, blinking, pulsating or intermittently lighted signage be reserved for public safety and driving messages to motorists The use of this type of signage for advertising is visually demanding and may be confusing to drivers These signs will increase the risk of hazards and may cause a slowing of traffic on arterial roadways such as Beach Boulevard The traffic division of Public Works has reviewed the request and recommends restrictions be placed on such signage if approved to prevent them from being distractions to motorists (see attached memo) Staff is recommending denial of the request for Code Amendment No 87-15 If the Planning Commission wishes to allow electronic reader boards in some form in the City of Huntington Beach staff recommends that this item be continued to allow Public Works and Community Development staff time to research and do traffic testing to determine restrictions to better regulate these signs and reduce their traffic hazard potentials Attached to the report are such requirements that could be addressed in a code section allowing these signs With a continuance, staff will research the suggested criteria as directed by the Planning Commission and determine which restrictions are appropriate to apply to electronic reader boards 9 . 0 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny Code Amendment No 87-15 with the following findings FINDINGS FOR DENIAL 1 Since the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, Section 961 (Sign Code) allows adequate opportunities for advertising through various types of signage, Code Amendment No 87-15 to allow electronic reader board signs is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights 2 Electronic reader board signs, if permitted by Code Amendment No 87-15, will be incompatible with surrounding existing and proposed developments, especially residential land uses 3 Electronic reader board signs, if permitted by Code Amendment No 87-15, will have the potential of creating a congestion and circulation hazard to passing motorists - ,'st Staff Report - 2/2/88 -3- (9940d) 10 . 0 ALTERNATIVE ACTION The Planning Commission may continue Code Amendment No 87-15 and direct staff to do the research and studies necessary to determine approprate code requirements for electronic reader boards ATJACHMENTS 1 Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, Section 9610 4 (Prohibited Signs) 2 Suggested restrictions for electronic reader boards 3 Suggested amendment submitted by applicant 4 Memo from Traffic Division, Public Works 5 General Sign Information 6 Elevation of sign proposed contingent on approval of Code Amendment No 87-15 SH PP kla F � Staff Report - 2/2/88 -4- (9940d) 9610 4 in thi article (c ) Co struction signs as defined by this article ( d) No tre assing signs as defined by this article and posted a minimum one hundred ( 100) feet apart (e ) Window signs s defined by thi$ article and restricted to a maximum of 20 perc t of the window area ( f ) Oil operations sig pursuant to Title 15 of the a Huntington Beach Municipal Co (g) Political signs, provide they do not pose a traffic or safety hazard, are not erected m e than forty-five (45) days prior to or removed more than fi een ( 15) days after an election Permission from the property caner shall be secured prior to the placement of such signs (Ur Ord 2874, 13 Oct 86 Ord 2832, 8/86) 9610 4 Prohibited signs The following signs are prohibited within the city of Huntington Beach (a) Flashing , moving, pulsating, or intermittently lighted �.- signs, including searchlights except public service signs such as those for time and temperature (b) Signs which conflict with any traffic control device due to color , wording, design, location, or illumination or with the safe and efficient flow of traffic, both vehicular and pedestrian ( c ) Animals or human beings, live or simulated, utilized as signs (d ) Loudspeakers or signs which emit sound, odor, or visible matter ( e ) Mechanicai movement signs ( t ) Roof signs as defined by this article kg ) Pro}ectirg signs as defined by this article ih ) lr angeat,ie copy signs including electronic reiderboards except theatre marquees e F_ 4� 4/87 9610 4 ( 1 ) Banners , flags , kites, pennants , or galloons, except it permitted as temporary signs pursuant to section 9610 9 (a ) ( j ) Signs which constitute a nuisance or hazard due to their intensity of light (k ) Billboards or advertising structures, including any off-site signs installed for the purpose of advertising a proj- ect, subject or business unrelated to the premises upon which the sign is located, except subdivision directional signs pur- suant to section 9610 9 ( c ) ( 1 ) Signs which no longer identify a bona fide business conducted on the premises Such signs shall be removea by the owner of the sign within sixty (60) days of the business ' closing date (m) Portable signs including "A-frame" signs and those of a similar nature which are not permanently attached to the ground or building (n ) Vehicle signs, signs affixed to automobiles, trucks , trailers or other vehicles on private or public property for the Basic purpose of advertising, identifying, or providing direction to a use or activity not related to the lawful use of the vehicle for delivering merchandise or rendering services Any such vehicles which have a., their primary purpose to serve a5 a nonmoving sign display ( o) Signs on any public property or pro3ecting within the public right-of-way, except those required by law, and polit- ical signs This section shal not prohibit the placement of advertising panels on trasr receptacles ana bicycle racks Ln punlicly-operated beaches and parks or on bus benches and transit shelters within public rights-of-way, provided such facilities are placed in accordance with a franchise granted pursuant to the city charter ( Urg Ord 2874 , 13 Oct 86, Ord 2832, 8/86 ) 7/87 j� , s 7 ATTACHMENT NO 2 SUGGESTED RESTRICTIONS FOR ELECTRONIC READER BOARD e 1 Minimum distance from residential 2 Minimum distance from other electronic signs 3 Sign height and area restrictions 4 Limit intensity of lighting 5 Limit number of message changes per minute 6 Establish minimum interval periods between messages 7 Limit or restrict animation 8 Limit hours of operation 9 Reduce other freestanding signage on-site per use 10 Require a time allotment to be reserved for public service messages such as times, temperature and traffic conditions 11 Limit electronic boards to specific locations such as Beach Boulevard corridor or ad]acent to the 405 freeway 12 Require Public Works review and approval 13 Require Design Review Board and Planning Commission approval through conditional use permit process Cal Trans has adopted four criteria for electronic reader boards along state roadways They are as follows 1 The proposed display will have no illumination which is in continuous motion or which appears to be in continuous motion 2 The display message will not change at a rate faster than one message every four seconds 3 The interval between messages will not be less than one second 4 The intensity of illumination will not change Fa The City of Carson allows electronic reader boards sub]ect to the following 1 Minimum 100 feet from residential 2 Minimum 500 feet from othr electronic signs 3 Sub]ect to height restriction in Sign Code (50 feet) 4 Requires written approval from City Engineer a 1208 Poinsettia Ave / Manhattan Beach CA 90266 / 213 379 y149- ors oeo + .e e o e e' • . r e WILSON FORD CODE AMENDNIDVT APPLICATION The following is a suggested amendment to Section 9610 4 Letter "h" to be eliminated and letter "a" to read as follows (a) Flashing, moving, pulsating, or intermittently lighted signs, including searchlights, except public service signs such as those for time & temperature, and electronic changeable readerboards � 01 F.."Q .S7 1 1 I! N 1®� CITY OF HUNTII GTON BEACH ' • INTER DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINCTON BEACH To Perm Po~t( ri From Bruce Gilmer 4K I'll -inninq Public Works Subject Illuminated Signs Date January 27, 1988 Changeable Messages In response to the submittal for a code amendment pertaining to the installation of changeable message electronic illuminated signs, the following comments are submitted for use in considera- tion of the amendment From a traffic safety perspective, certain common sense restric- tions must be placed on such installations These restrktions should address concerns regarding the following general categories 1 Animation - designed to catch the viewers attention 2 Duration of Message - affording the viewer adequate time to absorb the text of the message 3 Between Message Interval - indicating a change 4 IntensLty of Illumination - primarily a night time concern regarding distracting or blinding glare Each of these categories present a potential for removing the drivers attention from the roadway Each should therefore be the sub3ect of the proposed code modification to provide the appropriate minimum or maximum value allowed, e g the message shall not be displayed for a period of time less than five ( 5) seconds As we have discussed, other agencies have developed codes and guidelines pertaining to these signs Using the experience of those agencies, adoption of the appropriate sections of those codes for our situation on arterial highways would seem to be useful I will be available to review any section( s ) you would propose, if such a review is needed BHG lw cc Les Evans Jamal Rahimi F- ;z . s� PART I HUMAN LIMITATIONS IN PERCEPTION To communicate outdoor signing must register from a distance when people are in motion Failure to recognize the effect of a person s rate of motion upon the design consider ations for an outdoor sign can result in an ineffective communication The rate of motion is variable however it may be sub divided into two broad categories 1 Pedestrian 2 Vehicular The distance at which a sign must read is on part determined by the rate and type of motion Pedestrian motion is characterized by a wide range of variable sensory stimuli These involve frequent focal points with many highly differentiated spaces and objects Vehicular arteries are characterized by generally larger scale sensory stimuli consisting of free flowing forms widely spaced Objects and spaces are more difficult to compre hend from a vehicle than when one is a pedestrian A definite difference exists between the perceptual processes of the driver and the pedestrian Basically it is one of involvement Tests have conclusively demonstrated that there is little correlation between what one perceives as a driver and what one perceives as a pedestrian As published in Hamilton and Thurston s Human Limitations in Automobile Driving there are five limitations that increasing speed imposes on man 1 Man s concentration increases While stationary or walking man s attention may be widely dispersed but when moving in an automobile he concentrates on those factors which are relevant to the driving experience 2 The point of concentration recedes As speed or motion increases man s concentration is directed at a focal point increasingly further away 3 Peripheral vision diminishes As the eye concentrates on detail at a point of focus a great distance ahead the angular field of vision shrinks This shrink ing process is a function of focusing distance angle of vision and distance of foreground detail 0 s r 4 Foreground detail fades increasingly While concentrating on more signifi cant distant objects man perceives foreground objects to be moving and increasingly blurred 5 Space perception becomes impaired With decreasing amounts of time to perceive objects changing specific details are less noticeable making spatial perception more difficult It is evident then that design criteria for pedestrian oriented and motorist oriented signing should differ As the rate of motion increases it becomes increasingly impor taut that copy including illustrations and symbols be created specifically for out of doors and not merely rescaled from other media of communication The safety of the motorist and his passengers can depend upon the clarity of messages conveyed by signs f 1i( I 1 M •SO�np M \ \ (Itht Ll N(1( M c � d Ot of \ of /� ( I [ l h r 1 r ve r Relationship between focusing distance angle of vision and distance of foreground detail at speeds of 40 mph 50 mph and 60 mph The focusing point as diagrammed here does not include the effect of preceding traffic Gd VISUAL COMMUNICATION — RESEARCH PURPOSE It is the intent of this section to provide an understanding of the factors which should be considered for an effective outdoor visual communication Sample problems which utilize this research are included at the end of this section Recommended typefaces colors and design criteria for graphic symbols and logos are considered in the General Specifications section which follows OBJECTIVES Research and investigations were conducted in an attempt to gain information pertaining to visual communication Questions of primary interest were 1 What is the effect of speed upon a motorists comprehension of signs? 2 What is the ratio of sign s►ze to the proximity of the roadway i e how much better will a sign 20 from the road read than one 35 away 3 How large must a sign and its lettering be before it is deemed adequate under such varying conditions as a The speed at which a motorist is traveling b The amount of information displayed c The location of the sign when it redirects the path of a motor vehicle 4 What is the effect of various typefaces on the amount of information that may be grasped? 5 How does letter size affect the time necessary to read a sign? 6 What is the relationship between color and a legibility b visibility c memory d attention getting 7 What colors are recommended for outdoor use? 8 How much information can an observer remember in a single reading? RESEARCH SOURCES Contributions to the final version of this publication have been made by a number of agencies We are grateful for the assistance offered by The University of California at Los Angeles Education Psychology Library Dr Albert Burg and the U C L A Institute of Transportation and Traffic Engineering Foster and Kle►ser Outdoor Advertising The Automobile Club of Southern California A bibliography follows the information found herein THE MOTORIST AND LETTER LEGIBILITY There are two types of situations which involve the motorist and signs 1 Signs within the driver s direct cone of vision while driving 2 Signs outside the driver s direct cone of vision The first case is primarily a matter of vehicular motion related to letter legibility However in the second case the perpendicular distance from the sign to the road way becomes an Important factor Consider first of all a sign within the driver s direct cone of vision As previously noted In this section there are five limitations which are Imposed on the motorist The effects of these limitations have been Illustrated In a diagram relating speeds of 40 50 and 60 mph The following graphs are extensions from this diagram and were also published In Hamilton and Thurston s Human Lrmitatlons In Automobile Driving They relate vehicular motion to letter legibility 2500 40 38 --- - v 2250 36 — w 34 — w 2900 32 _ _ N 0 1750 = 30 -- w - - z 28 z 1500 — ------ 26 o 24 — ---- 1250 w < = 22 00 1000 w 20 - o — w w 750 -- - - -j 16 i —- 14 a 500 12 250 10 8 6 10 15 20 25 3C 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 0 200 400 600 800 1000 12001400 1600 1800 2000 SPEED(M PH ) LEGIBILITY D STANCE (FT) These graphs should be utilized when attempting to determine the letter height requirements for signs oriented to the freeway or highway motorist They apply only to signs which are on the property the sign pertains to and must be viewed at a distance sufficient enough to permit the motorist to make a safe exit from the motor way A gas station sign Is a prime example 'a ,o SAMPLE PROBLEM FOR A SIGN WITHIN THE DIRECT CONE OF VISION Problem A service station desires a sign to be oriented to motorists traveling 55 mph How big should the letters be? Solution Looking at the first graph we find that at 55 mph the drivers focal point is approximately 1600 ft away Looking at the second graph we find that a 33 inch letter is necessary to read 1600 ft i t Not all signs can be within the driver s direct cone of vision Traffic signs are fortunate in this respect and hence are seen quickly and easily without being distractive The majority of highway oriented billboards and signs however are outside the motorists direct cone of vision due to setback requirements and choices of location These signs must be related to perpendicular distances from the roadway for their legibility requirements The following sample problem illustrates the correct method to deter mine the visual requirements for signs outside the motorists direct cone of vision s � The Road Research Laboratory in England furnished a formula which relates the sideways displacement of a sign from the driver s path as a result of studies con ducted by them in 1962 The formula also considers the time taken to read a sign and its effect on the size of the lettering necessary If N = the number of names or words on a sign X = height of lower case letters in inches H = height of upper case letters in inches S = sideways displacement of the sign from the driver s path in feet V = driver s speed in m p h Then 1 Time to read a sign = N/3 + 2 sec 2 Letter height formulas X = (S) + (V) a (N + 6) 10 100 H = 4/3 x SAMPLE PROBLEM FOR A SIGN OUTSIDE THE DIRECT CONE OF VISION Problem The Irvine Company wishes to locate a Planned Community Travel Direction sign along a highway There will be 4 panels with the words University of Calif University Park Turtle Rock and Irvine Town Center A ten foot setback requirement must be observed The speed limit is 55 mph How big should the lettering be? Solution If N = 10 words V = 55 mph S = 10 ft Y Then X = (S) + (V) ® (N + 6) 10 100 X 10 + (55 x 16) 10 100 X = 1 + ( 55 x 16) Ans X = 9 80 = lower case letter height H = 4/3 x = 4/3 (9 80) Ans H = 136 = upper case letter ht THE PEDESTRIAN AND LETTER LEGIBILITY Although the experiments conducted on color and conspicuity directly relate to the pedestrian the application of the conspicuity principle for the determination of appropriate signing would not prove very successful The main problem which exists is that often the appropriate amount of area will not permit the appropriate letter height for legibility That is if the words on a sign are of great enough size to be legible the appropriate sign area may be restrictive depending upon the color of the sign There is a better approach for pedestrian oriented signing an approach based on letter legibilities Below is a chart relating the letter height of type faces to legibility distances This applies only to pedestrian signing Legibility Distance Per Series Inch of Letter Height Weak type faces 33 0 ft ASC1)EFG'kUKC,CP71Ci`PQRSZ Intermediate type faces 42 5 ft ABCDEFGHIJKLMN®PQRST Bold type faces 50 0 ft A CDEFGHIJKLMNOPO.RS Thus knowing the distance a sign must read one can easily determine the require ments for letter height The appropriate letter height as considered by The Irvine Company is 2112 times the requirement for legibility SAMPLE PROBLEM FOR A PEDESTRIAN SIGN Problem A tab sign is desired to be hung from the beams overhanging the front of a shop The words Dotty s Bakery are to be placed on the tab sign a How high should the lettering be? b How big should the sign be? Solution a Before utilizing the formulas for Pedestrian Oriented signs the distance from which the ski n must be read has to be determined Determine in this particular situation a visual limit is imposed by the pre Distance ceding sign as illustrated O L i MIRY 50' �i Nftw The distance at which Dotty s sign first becomes visible is at 50 feet away Dotty wants Old Fashioned letters to be used to convey the home made quality of her baked goods Old Fashi letters are not as legible as a block type face but are stronger than a delicate script Looking at t e Determine Uetter Legibility Table under Interme late Type faces we Letter find that one-inch high letters will be legible from 42 5 ft Style away This means that lettering slightly less than 1'/4 inch huh will be legible at 50 feet Multiplying the legibility height by two and one half yields the appropriate letter height of approximately 3 1/8 inch 2'/1 x 1'/4 inch = 2 x 1'/4 = 2 112 inch + '/2 x 1'/4 = 5/8 inch Appropriate Height = 3 1/8 inch For Lettering b Exoerience_has shown that the sign surface should be four times the lettering area The area of lettering in square inches is difficult to calculate unless it is mocked up in a rough sketch which relates the proper letter spacing and is then simply measured This is recommended procedure D 0 T TO Y 'S , "Do, A K S RY 1 (4) x (lettering areal = Sign area Legible typography is conducive to prolonging attention Typefaces with fairly heavy and uniform strokes are most legible No more than twenty five percent of the total sign area should be covered by letters and/or num ers In addition to aiding legibility liberal negative space when enclosing the copy creates a target on which the viewer s eye can focus quickly This is especially important for glance legibility 490, PART 11 VISUAL COMMUNICATION GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS FOR INVESTIGATIONS 1 Signs lust as highways should be designed and constructed for the individual with poor vision rather than for the average person 2 Signs should be designed constructed and placed for easy readah�l�ty_ Hence a Signs must gain an individuals attention but not be distracting b Signs must be readable at a point which permits a sufficient warning time and distance for an individual s (particularly the motorist s) compliance 3 Pedestrian oriented and motorist oriented signs have different criteria of design VISIBILITY AND LEGIBILITY Legibility distance is about 85% of visibility distance A laboratory study showed that visibility and legibility are not independent conditions which reduce legibility will proportionately reduce visibility Legibility distance at night is generally only 88% of daytime legibility This pro portion varies depending upon color of lettering and background LETTER AND WORD LEGIBILITY A comparison of lower case and capital letters yields the fact that lower case letters have a slightly greater legibility distance Capitals are seen more quickly but lower case letters can be read more rapidly a point to remember when pre paring copy for motorist oriented signs along highways and freeways In a study comparing glance legibility for block and rounded capital letters it was found that rounded letters were recognized 8% better than the block letters Glance Legibility is a minimum glance to see a target out of the five degree (5 ) arc of clear seeing (hereinafter referred to as the Direct Cone of Vision } Glance Legibility requires from 6 to 1 0 second r J COLOR AND CONSPICUITY An experiment attempted to determine at what point a white sign became con spicuous in a rural setting The subjects were told to walk back in a field until they felt the sign was judged to be adequate Black lettering was represented by strips of wood attached to the white surface The results revealed that at 250 yards a white sign had to be 16 square feet in area A second experiment attempted to determine the amount by which signs of va- us colors would have to be larger or sma er t an w e sig o e equally conspicuous The results in terms of the amount of area a colored sign had to exceed a white sign were Yellow Orange White Red Blue Green Black 8% 0 0 7% 24% 42% 125% A later test conducted in an urban business street using similar procedures gave results very similar to these In conclusion to be conspicuous under open conditions at 250 yards signs of different colors have to be of different sizes To be equally conspicuous in shaded areas the colored sign areas have to be doubled a�r Black Blue Red Orange Yellow White 36 sq ft 22 sq ft 18 sq ft 16 sq ft 14 sq ft The results of these experiments have been included in this manual to IIlustrate the fallacy of current signing legislation which ignores the relationships of color and sig area and also to serve as a qeneral re erence for determining equal conspicuity for - signs o ifferent colors s 7a' �. DESIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR GRAPHIC SYMBOLS AND LOGOS Effective graphic communication_ should leave no room for different interpretations Its function is to communicate a message in the most effective and direct way Design criteria for outdoor lettering have been noted in the preceding pages Although criteria for the design of graphic symbols cannot be as detailed as that for lettering styles, there are certain general requirements which should be con sidered when designing or weighing the merits of a symbol GRAPHIC SYMBOLS SHOULD 1 Contain only essential elements and be free of minute detail ,.� 2 Be able to be enlarged and reduced without the loss of comprehension of any single element —�' S Be as easily understood in black and white as in color .,� 4 Be simple and target like, that is, draw the viewer s eye to itself as an arrow would find the center of a bull's eye —P 5 Be readily understood and communicate as clearly as possible Below are a number of graphic symbols Those on the right conform more closely with the requirements set forth above than those on the left „�eim AV?a S 14 140L.afmd `�r�,�r 7%&SAW d It UNIrED ITA6� 1A/d, ® 0 FRANCS 07 2t � 'y 1Ota� r�lc Mum � 'T Ir���c�r�rlY Mom.CO.pylNi`.r,�"r«s.�tut�t+eo ,awm,r oar dHl� I�rewoia. �lt�a�c®Jr i11�rs yfpJ� y ae A ya�i� /Al iy �C w SOY �Y @EAC C� va (� N C AAa FeAa dAera s 9nr � 7 9 F _ N P9RkING P a@. 0 �fRy CE e W ti (if. l7rA('- Pc o T Pc A N �.IR c)(AC7 a M N i z 44, 6 0 0 00105*tL 0 Petition CCU~ Members of The Planning Commission , �e Let this petition serve as community opposition to the granting of the special sign permit #87-18 which enables Wilson Ford to erect an electronic sign 50 feet in height with a 400 square foot message board Our position does not derive from an anti -commerce viewpoint The right to advertise is historically linked to constitutional free speech However in an area zoned residential , the right to be free from advertisement is lest as critical to protect A sign , the magnitude of the proposed one , will be visible from many of our homes and back yards This is not a political battle but a quality 1 1 f e issue Members of the commission , ask yourself if you ' d like to look out the window of your home and see a 400 square foot electronic advertisement for automobiles The under- igned homeowners and residents urge you to protect our quality of homelife and retain the existing limitations on commercial advertising Name Address r-- 2 `82 7 1 ,cry�C.0 O 3 1 5 a b $jIL e4+.r� g "Z 9 Lit Ulm. (lrc� y fr � ('1c1' 12 ` s F_c:) 77 1001 Name Address -r. n 14 }� 'N 3n 1 39 � �<d t fA c r 15 �- 16 /V � C4 N 18 20 ? /C 21 � `�� /13 3/� ��� 7 - 2 2 tl )IL A 23 2 4`'j / 25 2 b 27 2 8 --xtc T)k t 21 30 32 33 _ f 34 ---7 -�. 35 36 37 38 1 '79 Name Address 39 ; 40 ; _ , �s ft 41 42 / 43 44 45 46 , r — , 47 48 49 50 5152 J J 53 54 56 51 58 59 60 r 61 ` 62 , 64 65 10 0-~ January 27, 1988 huntington Beach Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 RE Citizens, householder, and taxpayers against the approval of Special Sign Permit No 87-18 and Cooe Amendment No 87-15 ATTN Mike Adams - Planning Commission The below signed residence and taxpayers and owner of properties in the immediate area of W-1son Ford Company, located at 18255 Beach Blvd , Huntington Beach, do herein wish to voice their opinion in unison AGAINST the issuance of a permit to erect said sign under Special Sign Permit No 87-18 and are definitely against modifying the Code Amendment No 87-15 The concerned below named citizens have met in group sessions, on and off since receiving these both notices and have viewed the on-site of Wilson Ford and find that the so callers "electronic reader board" not necessary If, you would take into consideration the motor vehicle traffic on Beach Blvd , which would be hindered by the distraction of this sign and would cause more accidents Just stop and think, the Ford sign that is now there is visible from a two block surrounding area Now envision a sign 50 feet in the air with 400 square feet of space, which would light up a mile area, this we do not need Inciting our feelings and denial of the changing of Code Amendment No 87-15, we wish to state it is not necessary for any modificat-on or changing at this time Let us not make Beach Blvd and Automobile Row such as you have now on Harbor Blvd in Costa Mesa We thank you for taking the tzrie to read this at your hearing and sincerely hope that our feelings and recommendations are adhered to Respectfully, Name Address r � WrlF,.am F Wamhoff, Jr 18341 Pammy Lane, H 8 el �a l d L 1 -e f Helga Wamhoff i 1 341 Panmiy Lane, 8 B ?UJ3 41,2 � 1�1{caC� .'/lir3"�y�c l Z-0's2 2 12 I 0 d F- ;� g" 0 a Name Address l o $ Page 2 of 2 CERTIFICATION BY DISPLAY OWNER COVERING MESSAGE CENTER DISPLAYS The undersigned hereby certifies that they desire -to place a message center display on their property and understand that such display may only be used to advertise the business con- ducted or services rendered or goods produced or sold on the property on which the display is to be placed. In addition, the undersigned certifies that said display will be operated so that it meets the following criteria f (a) The proposed dzsp_lay u.11-have-noilluminat3on w h his in contiruous motion or which appears to be in continuous motion,a� l (b) The display message will not change at a rate fAster than one message every four seconds f (c) The interval between messages will not �e less than one secondg (d) The intensity of illumination will not change d'j' (signature) IJ � STATE OF CALIFORNIA—DEPAR 4T OF TRANSPORTATION OUTDOOR ADVERTISING BRANCH . Do not write in this space .61 TRANSPORTATION BUILDING 1120 N STREET P 0 BOX 1499 SACRAMENTO CALIFORNIA 95907 I)Ititrl(t (O Rtc b Road 'U APPLICATION FOR STATE OUTDOOR 10"t Mdc z 0 ADVERTISING STRUCTURE PERMIT Audit No Date 6ianted ( R No C omplete all Sections A copy will be returned for your records Issuance of a permit will be delayed unless all items are filled in nd the proper fees remitted Make checks money orders etc payable to the Dcpaitment of 'I ransportation I i eliminary Review Rcyacst F ce $t0 00 $ 1pplic ation E et (non refundable) $l0 00 $ V shaped structures are i ut mit 1,ee(refundable if application not sE,pardte displays and approved unless previously cited) 1000 $ I require separate applications (,natty Nee(assessed if applicant placed Structure prior to approval) 1000 $ All permits expire Do-cember 31 DISPLAY OWNER WILSON FORD — IRINI N1'NF Of fIHMOµ N!N( Slltl( It HhiSR DICK WILSON 18255 Beach Boulevard, Huntington Beach Ca. 92648 IRINI N1Mh(1h 09NhRof FIRM SIRHIAUI HhSS 1 O h( \ (IIY /11 PROPERTY OWNER OR PERSON IN CONTROL OF PROPERTY UPON WHICH DISPLAY IS SITUATED SAME I RINI NAW I hf h 1 AI Dhf SS (171 /1I If consent to placing is written check here [21 PROPER rY OWNER MUST SIGN HER); if consent is VERBAL i Display to be installed in ORANGE / HiINTlNG TON BEACH _ on the W qT —_ side of_ #3_9 _ NAMh Oh((I1iN11 NAMP Oh IN(OHIORA111 (it I N S h W s7 llf Rut 1 NO BEACH BOULEVARD 12' Feet/Miles SOUTH of T YT OR DRTVF R(IADOXSr711,11NAMP NSfW N VIP Oh NI 1Rh S 1(10,S h 0 l h 1,i INNh I 1 ASS AP#159-031-01 C-4 A SSh SSOR S I AR(h l NO /)NIN( I Proposed installation date 5/1/8 Owner s Identification No If display has been cited Notice No 1 o be placed by ELFC'TRA-IMIA _— NIVIP Oh IIRAI Al11JXh SS Display Location Sketch Show U S or State Route Numbers or Name of Street Show Name of Nearest Crossroad Over/Underpass or Nearest Landmark Indicate Sin;jt- Panel thus 1 Indicate 'v shaped Display thus—V Show distance of display from intersection N utIs SIIA( r rORIOCAIION SlctIClt DESCRIPTION OF DISPLAY Material((he(h) W 1 Panel Height 8'ltength24'111alllood ❑ M,tal ® Other ❑ Uprihhts Number__Size_22' ❑ ® ❑ S Distance between panel and ground 41'11" Illumination9 VeS Reflector M act ial P no Copy one side ❑ Both sides 91 Indicate facing N&S f (NSF W) ir(i of a V shaped display ❑ 1 Adveitising Copy WILSON FORD - t - t� 1 { 4 The applicant hereby agrees to place and maintain the adv(rtismg described above in i(cordam c with the provisions oft he Outdoor Advertisirig u t local zoning ordina ces and any oth(i applic able i cl,ul ituins ncc applic tnt(c t titu S t h tt III( st to niuits made in this applic ition ai c true (id understands that y neo sect star ment of fact may be gioun for the,denial of i petnut of lot rt%ocation if already brantcd a 6-& �>1GN HERE 'I California, a- ,19 A1Sf AY OWNN I IHUH!/I I(fN1 1 1 �r D11f W /L d Must be completed 1(r t t:deral Aid O M ODA 2 NO rE REVERSE )AM DM SIDE 1 Of LAC LMEN1 CRI 1 F ILIA pr n11ry )nd Intcrstite Highways (Fv 6,851 �,� l l b /",7 rt Cook L.4-4ak Tom Bematz & Associates K css 2914 East Katella Avenue Suite 203 ' ZZ > �r Orange California 92667 � d (714) 997 1785C 4, C�v '� 6<,4PC�r � T 74 —Developers- Investors—