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—