HomeMy WebLinkAboutElectronic Readerboards - Code Amendment 89-6 - Negative Dec t „ ,� � 4wYr\ �,y�..54MN�iJi.1:+ � •ltYy t r �i �
ORDINANCE NO. 3019
' AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY- OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
AMENDING THE HUNTINGTON BEACH ORDINANCE CODE
SECTIONS 9610 .4 , 9610 . 5, u9610 . 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 :
(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)
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 program according to
the provisions of Section 9610 . 6 and approval of the Design Review
- 1 -
Board according to the provisions of Article 985 . Approval of
electronic readerboards shall be subject to the following :
( 1) Findings : Prior to approving a conditional use permit
' I to allow an electronic readerboard sign, the Planning
Commission shall make the following findings :
The proposed electronic readerboard sign conforms with the
standards and criteria as set forth in the Huntington Beach
Ordinance Code;
The proposed electronic readerboard sign is compatible with
other signs on the site and in the vicinity;
The proposed electronic readerboard sign will not adversely
impact traffic circulation in adjacent rights-of-way or
create a hazard to vehicle or pedestrian traffic; and
The proposed electronic. readerboard sign shall not have
adverse visual impacts on adjoining residential
neighborhoods .
(2) Permitted Signs .
Electronic readerboards may be freestanding or wall type
_ signs .
j The maximum number of electronic readerboards shall be one
i per site.
The maximum sign area shall be one hundred fifteen ( 115)
square feet-; ninety (90) square feet for message center and twenty
five (25) square feet for identification.
The maximum height of an electronic readerboard sign shall
be twenty five (25) 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 50-foot candles at the property line.
(3) 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,
excluding the portion along Beach Boulevard designated as a
landscape corridor south of Adams 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
I any residence shall be one hundred fifty ( 150) feet .
The minimum distance from an electronic readerboard sign to
any residence shall be one hundred (100) feet .
1
2 -
3019
„1 (4) Other Standards .
In addition to the electronid readerboard sign, one
monument sign, maximum of seven (7) feet in height and a maximum of
fifty (50) square feet in sign area, rhay be permitted and all other
signage shall be brought into conformance with the provisions of
this article .
Where a site has an electronic readerboard, temporary
banners , balloons , flags , etc . , .shall be permitted a maximum of
fifteen ( 15) days per calendar year .
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 announcements .
Messages in 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 to add the following :
( 15) Electronic Readerboard: a changeable message sign
consisting of a matrix of lamps which are computer controlled.
( 16) Fl,ashing 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 .
( 17) Freestanding sign: any sign permanently attached
to the ground and which does not have a building as its primary
structural support .
(18) Grade : the level of the public sidewalk or street curb
closest to the sign.
(19) Grand opening : a promotional activity not exceeding thirty
(30) calendar days used by newly established businesses to inform
the public of their location and services .
(20) Ground level : the highest elevation of the existing ground
surface under a sign.
(21) Height of sign: the vertical distance measured from
average ground level along the base of the . sign structure, before
any berming, to the highest point of the structure.
i (22) Indirect illumination: a light cast on the surface of a
- sign from an exterior source.
3 -
3019
(23) Industrial center : any site containing three (3) or more
.y: industrial activities .
.,- (24) Interior illumination: any sign face which is artificially
lit from the inside.
(25) Item of information: each word, design, symbol, or figure.
(26) Land development project : any industrial, commercial, or
residential development containing five (5) or more parcels or
dwelling units which are proposed for construction.
(27) Monument sign: a low profile freestanding sign erected
with its base on the ground and which is designed to incorporate
design and building materials which complement the architectural
theme of the buildings on the premises . A monument sign shall not
exceed seven (7) feet in height . Berming incorporated with the
placement of the sign shall be included in any height measurement .
The base of a monument sign shall not be counted as sign area .
(28) Logo : a trademark or company name symbol .
(29) Nameplate sign: an attached sign which designates the
names and/or address of a business , and/or the words "entrance" or
"exit" .
(30) Nonconforming sign: a sign which complied with the
Huntington Beach Ordinance Code at the time it was installed, but
which is now in conflict with the provisions of this article.
(31) Open house sign: a sign which identifies a building for
sale or lease which is open and available for inspection, and sets
forth no other advertisement .
(32) Political sign: a sign identifying either a candidate for
public office or an issue relating to a forthcoming election.
(33) Projecting sign: a sign which projects from the wall of a
building more than eighteen (18) inches and which has its display
surface perpendicular to such wall .
(34) Real estate sign: a temporary sign in that the
premises on which the sign is located is for sale, lease or rent .
(35) Roof sign: an attached sign constructed upon or over a
roof , or placed so as to extend above the visible roofline; or a
freestanding sign which is greater in height than the building it
serves to identify.
(36) Sign: any medium for visual communication, including its
structure and component parts , which is used or intended to be used
to attract attention.
4 -
3019
(37) Sign copy: any words , letters, numbers , figures, designs
or other symbolic representation incorporated into a sign for the
purpose of attracting attention. _.
(38) Sign structure : any structure which supports any sign.
(39) Site: one or more parcels of land identified by the
assessor ' s records . Where an integrated building development has
been approved or proposed, the site shall include all parcels of
land contained within or a part of the development application. An
integrated building development shall include all parcels served by
common access ways , driveways , parking and landscaping .
(40) Site (street) frontage: the length of a lot or parcel of
land along or fronting on a street .
(41) Subdivision directional sign: a sign providing direction
to a land development project pursuant to this article .
(42) Supergraphic : a painted design which covers an area
greater than 10 percent of a wall, building facade, or other
structure.
(43) Temporary sign: any sign constructed of cloth, plastic,
paper or similar material displayed for a limited period of time
outside a building .
(44) Trespassing sign: a sign which contains the following copy
Y only, "No trespassing . "
(45) Wall sign: any sign which is attached or erected on the
exterior wall of a building including the parapet, with the display
surface of the sign parallel to the building wall, and which does
not project more than eighteen (18) inches from the building, or
project above the height of the wall or parapet .
(46) Window sign: a sign in which the name, address, phone
number, or hours of operation are applied directly to the window of
a business . (Ord . 2832 , 20 Aug 86)
SECTION 5 . Section 9610 . 9 (a) Temporary Signs is amended as
follows :
9610 . 9 Miscellaneous provisions . (a) Temporary signs .
Temporary banners , flags, or pennants may be permitted for a maximum
of three (3) times per year for a total of ninety (90) days each
calendar year to identify a special event such as a grand opening or
anniversary sale . Approval shall be subject to the discretion of
the director for other events ; however, a spacial event shall not
mean the occasional promotion of retail sales by a business . A cash
bond to guarantee removal shall be required. Automobile dealerships
shall be subject to a six (6) month maximum time period provided a
planned sign program is approved prior to the display. Sites with
electronic readerboards shall be permitted to have temporary signs
displayed a maximum of fifteen ( 15) days per calendar year .
5 -
3019
SECTION 6 . 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 20th
day of November 1989 .
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
- City Clerk City�A�torney�"
1 REVIEWED AND APPROVED: INITIATED AND APPROVED:
VV
City administrator Direct r of C mmunity
Development
'i
I "
6 -
Ord. No. 3019
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss:
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH )
I , CONNIE BROCKWAY, the duly appointed, qualified City
Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach and ex-officio Clerk of the
City Council of the said City, do hereby certify that the whole number
of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven;
that the foregoing ordinance was read to said City Council at a regular
meeting thereof held on the 6th day of November
1989 and was again read to said City Council at a regular
meeting thereof held on the 20th day of November , 19_B _, and
was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of
all the members of said City Council .
AYES: Councilmembers:
MacAllister Mays Bannister, Silva. Erskine
NOES: Councilmembers:
Winchell , Green
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
None
City Clerk and ex-officio erk
of the City Council of the City _
of Huntington Beach, California
Up_aPA4
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION O L-ch
Date October 2, 1989
Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Member
Submitted by: Paul Cook, City Administrator
Prepared by: Mike Adams, Director, Community Development
Subject: APPEAL - CODE AMENDMENT NO. 89-6/NEGATIVE DECLARATION
NO. 89-15
Consistent with Council Policy? [ ] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception
Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments:
STATEMENT OF ISSUE•
This appeal of the Planning Commission' s denial of Code Amendment
No. 89-6 and Negative Declaration No. 89-15 was continued from the
City Council meeting of September 5, 1989 . The proposed code
amendment would allow for electronic readerboard signs within the
City of Huntington Beach.
RECOMMENDATION•
.Planning Commission Recommendation:
ON MOTION BY MOUNTFORD AND SECOND BY KIRKLAND, THE PLANNING
COMMISSION, ON AUGUST 1, 1989, DENIED CODE AMENDMENT NO. 89-6 AND
NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 89-15 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Mountford, Kirkland, Shomaker, Williams, Ortega, Leipzig
NOES: Bourguignon
ASBENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Findings For Denial :
1. Since the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, Article 961, allows
adequate opportunities for advertising through various types
of signage, Code Amendment No. 89-6 to allow electronic
readerboard signs is not necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of substantial property rights .
2 . Electronic readerboard signs, if permitted by Code Amendment
No . 89-6 will be incompatible with surrounding existing and
proposed development, especially residential land uses .
pin s/s�
3 . Electronic readerboard signs visible from City streets would
have the potential of slowing traffic and distracting passing
motorists .
4 . Code Amendment No. 89-6 to permit 35 foot high, 200 square
foot electronic readerboards would be incompatible with the
majority of existing signs constructed throughout the City
since 1974 .
5 . Electronic readerboard signs as requested by Code Amendment
No. 89-6 are more appropriate adjacent to freeways where there
is not a mixture of vehicle/pedestrian flow, there is a
greater maximum speed limit, and less competition among signs .
Staff Recommendation:
Staff concurs with the Planning Commission and recommends that the
City Council deny the appeal, and deny Code Amendment No. 89-6 with
the above findings .
ANALYSIS:
This item was continued from the September 5, 1989, Council meeting
to allow staff to analyze alternatives to the applicant' s requested
code amendment. The applicant ' s proposal would allow for electronic
readerboard signs up to 35 feet in height, 200 square feet in area,
on parcels with at least 200 feet of frontage on I-405 or Beach
Boulevard north of Adams Avenue. The proposed locational criteria
would allow up to 53 businesses/property owners to apply for such '
signs within the City, not accounting for future lot consolidation
to attain the minimum required street frontage.
Staff continues to recommend denial of the request. A complete
analysis is contained in the attached Request for Council Action
dated September 5, 1989 .
As an alternative, should the Council wish to approve a code
amendment to permit readerboards, staff recommends a scaled-down
sign which is more in keeping with existing signs along Beach
Boulevard and with the current sign code. This would include a
maximum 15 foot high sign, maximum 100 square feet in area, with
eligible businesses/properties to have at least 400 feet of frontage
along I-405 or Beach Boulevard north of Adams Avenue. This
alternative would allow up to 18 property owners to apply for
readerboards, not accounting for future lot consolidation. A
comparison chart of the applicant ' s proposal and staff ' s alternative
are also contained in the attached Request for Council Action.
Staff will be prepared at the October 2, 1989 City Council meeting
to illustrate various alternatives available.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS:
Pursuant to the environmental regulations in effect at this time,
the Department of Community Development posted draft Negative
Declaration No. 89-15 for ten days, and no comments, either verbal
RCA 10/2/89 -2- (3699d)
or written were received. The staff, in its initial study of the
project, has recommended that a negative declaration be issued.
Prior to any action on Code Amendment No. 89-6 it is necessary for
the City Council to review and act on Negative Declaration No.
89-15 . Staff feels that, should the requested code amendment be
approved, the suggested restrictions and criteria outlined in the
attached draft ordinances will mitigate potentially adverse impacts
to a level that is not significant pursuant to CEQA Guidelines .
This does not mean, however, that all land use related impacts will
be completely eliminated, as discussed in the Analysis section of
this report .
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
The City Council may take one of the following alternative actions :
A. Approve Negative Declaration No. 89-15 and Code Amendment No.
89-6 as proposed by the applicant with findings; or
B. Approve Negative Declaration No. 89-15 and Code .Amendment No.
89-6 as modified by staff and/or the Council, with findings .
ATTACHMENTS.
1. Request for Council Action dated September 5, 1989 .
PC/MA/LP: lab
(3699d)
RCA 10/2/89 -3- (3699d)
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
October 4, 1989
Roger Miller Honda
19232 Beach Blvd.
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
The City Council granted your appeal relative to
Code Amendment No. 89-6 and Negative Declaration
No. 89-15 with modifications.
A copy of the minutes of the City Council will be
forwarded to you when completed.
,�X� Gem
Connie Brockway, CIVIC
City Clerk
CB:pm
CC: Mike Adams , Director, Community Development
City Attorney j
(Telephone: 714-536-5227)
RAFFERTY & LLOYD
September 30, 1989
City Council Members
Huntington Beach, California
Dear Council Members;
�I°m BT11 Lloy and d have been a member of the Board of-Realtors of Huntington
Beach- Fountain Valley jfor over_l-8_y_ear_s.,and have specialized in selling homes in
the Huntington Riviera tract. Next to this tract is one street of homes that
parallels Beach Blvd is Pammy Lane. This street backs up against Friendly Ford,
which is a misnomer, anyway these homes are more dificult to sell because of the
car lot. They have created a second parking lot, a test drive area, a unloading area
at all hours, and kept the area will fortified with lights at nights. The lights from
the car lot have taked away from these homes their nights. The added lighted
board or sign would again take more night away from these-r_e.s_i.dence u less
maybe the sign could be restricted under ten feet._1'm_oppose.d_t.o lig eth d signage?
that_sp_i-1-ls-into-sing-1 e-r-es.i.dences
gSirely,
Bill Llo
Broker
10101 SLATER AVE. SUITE 102 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA 92708 714-963-5568
Ile
Each office independently owned and operated _ y (' ..'' / a
i
i
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION
HUNTINGTON BEACH
Gail Hutton, City Attorney Connie Brockway, City Clerk
To Paul Cook, City Administrator From
Appeal — Code Amendment 89-6 9/14/89
Subject (Electronic Readerboards) Date
Mr. Jeff LeBow, following the close of the public hearing and
continuance of decision to 10/2/89 asked the Mayor how, as this is a
City—wide issue, people would be notified of the meeting. Staff
responded that a legal notice is placed in the Daily Pilot 10 days prior
to the meeting which is correct relative to the past 9/5/89 meeting; at
which time mailed notification was given to approximately 44 property
owners within 300' of the appellant' s location and to Mr. LeBow and
another person who had requested notification.
However, Mr. LeBow appeared to asking relative to notification of the
October 2nd meeting. I think there was a mix—up in communication. The
public hearing is closed and to my knowledge, further notification and
advertisement has not been made.
In the way of background information, at the two previous code amendment
hearings each at different locations, property owners were notified in
those respective areas. Property owners from (CA 87-15) were also
notified of (CA 88-14) . These people from these two areas have not been
notified of this hearing, only the people 300' from Roger Miller Honda.
Please notify me as to the possibility of further notification being
required.
CC: Mayor & City Councilmembers
Mike Adams, Community Development Director
i
R
i
2007k/me
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION
HUNTINGTON BEACH
Gail Hutton, City Attorney Connie Brockway, City Clerk
To Paul Cook, City ADministrator From
Appeal — Code Amendment 89-6 9/14/89
Subject (Electronic Readerboards) Date
. i
Mr. Jeff LeBow, following the close of the public hearing and
continuance of decision to 10/2/89 asked the Mayor how, as this is a
City—wide issue, people would be notified of the meeting. Staff
responded that a legal notice is placed in the Daily Pilot 10 days prior
to the meeting which is correct relative to the past 9/5/89 meeting; at
which time mailed notification was given to approximately 44 property
owners within 300' of the appellant' s location and to Mr. LeBow and
another person who had requested notification.
However, Mr. LeBow appeared to asking relative to notification of the
October 2nd meeting. I think there was a mix—up in communication. The
public hearing is closed and to my knowledge, further notification and
advertisement has not been made.
In the way of background information, at the two previous code amendment
hearings each at different locations, property owners were notified in
those respective areas. Property owners from (CA 87-15) were also
notified of (CA 88-14) . These people from these two areas have not been
notified of this hearing, only the people 300' from Roger Miller Honda.
Please notify me as to the possibility of further notification being
required.
CC: Mayor & City Councilmembers
Mike Adams, Community Development Director
2007k/me
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
Date September 5, 1989
Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Submitted by: Paul Cook, City Administratovr ��, .
Prepared by: Michael Adams, Director of Community Developmen
Subject: APPEAL - CODE AMENDMENT NO. 89-6/NEGATIVE DECLARATION� NO.
89-15
Consistent with Council Policy? [ Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception
Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments: AD
STATEMENT OF ISSUE•
Transmitted for your consideration is an appeal submitted by Chief
Neon Sign Company of the Planning Commission' s denial of Code
Amendment No. 89-6, a request by Roger Miller Honda to permit
electronic readerboard signs within the City of Huntington Beach.
The appellant disagrees with the findings of the Planning Commission.
RECOMMENDATION:
Planning Commission Recommendation:
ON MOTION BY MOUNTFORD AND SECOND BY KIRKLAND, THE PLANNING
COMMISSION, ON AUGUST 1, 1989, DENIED CODE AMENDMENT NO. 89-6 AND
NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 89-15 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Mountford, Kirkland, Shomaker, Williams, Ortega, Leipzig
NOES: Bourguignon
ASBENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Findings For Denial :
1. Since the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, Article 961, allows
adequate opportunities for advertising through various types
of signage, Code Amendment No. 89-6 to allow electronic
readerboard signs is not necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of substantial -property rights .
2 . Electronic readerboard signs, if permitted by Code Amendment
No . 89-6 will be incompatible with surrounding existing and
proposed development, especially residential land uses .
3 . Electronic readerboard signs visible from City streets would
have the potential of slowing traffic and distracting passing
motorists .
PIO 5/85
4 . Code Amendment No. 89-6 to permit 35 foot high, 200 square
foot electronic readerboards would be incompatible with the
majority of existing signs constructed throughout the City
since 1974 .
5 . Electronic readerboard signs as requested by Code Amendment
No. 89-6 are more appropriate adjacent to freeways where there
is not a mixture of vehicle/pedestrian flow, there is a
greater maximum speed limit, and less competition among signs .
Staff Recommendation:
Staff concurs with the Planning Commission and recommends that the
City Council deny the appeal, and deny Code Amendment No. 89-6 with
the above findings .
ANALYSIS•
Applicant: Roger Miller Honda
Appellant: Chief Neon Sign Company
Introduction•
Code Amendment No. 89-6 and Negative Declaration No. 89-15
constitute a request to amend Article 961 of the Huntington Beach
Ordinance Code (Sign Code) to permit the use of electronic
readerboard signs within the City of Huntington Beach. Currently,
Section 9610 .4(a) of the Code prohibits "flashing, moving, pulsating
or intermittently lighted signs including searchlights; except
public service signs such as those for time and temperature. "
Section 9610.4(h) prohibits "changeable copy signs, including
electronic readerboards; except theatre marquees . " The requested
code amendment would amend these prohibitions to exempt electronic
readerboards, add specifications and locational criteria for such
signs, and amend certain definitions to accommodate the
aforementioned changes .
In general, the applicant ' s requested ordinance would allow a
taller, larger sign than is currently permitted by code. The
maximum height for readerboards would be 35 feet instead of the 15
feet permitted for other types of signs and the maximum area
permitted would be 200 square feet instead of a maximum of 70 square
feet as currently permitted. The applicant proposes electronic
readerboards be considered for parcels with at least 200 feet of
frontage along the freeway and along Beach Boulevard (excluding the
portion of Beach Boulevard between Adams Avenue and Pacific Coast
Highway) . Various other locational and design criteria are proposed
as outlined in the Analysis section below.
The appellant notes in his letter of appeal that he and Roger Miller
Honda feel that a readerboard would be appropriate at their
location. However, it is important to note that the applicant would
not be the only property owner eligible to apply for a readerboard
should this code amendment be approved. Rather, up to 53
businesses/property owners along Beach Boulevard and the 405 Freeway
would be eligible, depending on the criteria proposed.
RCA 9-5-89 -2- (3440d)
Background:
Two similar code amendments (Code Amendment No. 87-15 and Code
Amendment No . 88-14) have been denied by the Planning Commission
within the past 18 months . Neither denial was overturned by the
City Council . A description of these actions is contained in the
attached Planning Commission Staff Report dated August 1, 1989 .
Analysis •
There are four primary issues involved with the Code Amendment:
height, sign area, the concept of moving/changing message type
signs, and compatibility with other signs and surrounding land uses .
1 . Height :
From 1974 to 1986, the Sign Code permitted signs up to 20 feet in
height within 20 feet of the front property line. Signs up to 25
feet in height were permitted provided they were setback more than
20 feet from the front property line. The current code, adopted in
1986, limits sign height to 7 feet -for parcels with less that 400
feet of frontage and to 15 feet for parcels with more than 400 feet
of street frontage. This code amendment request is to allow signs
up to 35 feet in height for parcels with 200 feet of frontage, with
no front setback restrictions . This would be incompatible with
other signs in the City established since 1974 and contrary to the
current code.
2 . Size:
Prior to 1986, the size limit was based upon one square foot of sign
area per one lineal foot of lot frontage with maximum 100 square
feet for signs within 12 feet of the front property line. A maximum
of 150 square feet was permitted for signs within 13 to 20 feet of
the front property line, and a maximum of 200 square feet for signs
greater than 20 feet from the front property line. The varying
setback requirement in relation to size was to reduce the impact of
a large sign close to public streets . Freestanding signs are
currently limited to 70 square feet in size (80 square feet within
an opaque background) on parcels with over 400 feet of frontage, and
to 30 square feet (40 square feet within an opaque background, on
parcels with less than 400 feet of frontage. Due to the reduced
area of the signs, there is no minimum or varied setback requirement
from the front property line. Proposed Code Amendment No. 89-6 is
for a maximum 200 square foot sign area anywhere on the site (it may
be within the front 25 foot building setback area) provided the site
has a minimum 200 foot lot frontage. This size limit and location
is incompatible with other signs constructed along Beach Boulevard
since 1974 .
3 . Moving/Changing Type Signs :
Electronic readerboards may increase the risk of hazardous
distraction to motorists . Use of flashing signs for advertising is
visually demanding and may be confusing to drivers, thereby causing
RCA 9-5-89 -3- (3440d)
slowing of traffic on arterial highways and increasing potential
vehicle/pedestrian conflicts . Electronic readerboard signs are more
appropriate along freeways where the speed limit is 55 mph and there
is not a mixture of vehicle/pedestrian flow. Beach Boulevard is
posted maximum 45 mph and has sidewalks on both sides for pedestrian
use. A high sign coupled with moving/changing messages may increase
the potential of vehicle/pedestrian conflict. Staff recommends that
the use of flashing, blinking, pulsating, or intermittently lighted
signs be reserved for public safety, signalized intersections and
driving safety/control messages to motorists .
4 . Compatibility:
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 . The intent of the revised ordinance was to limit sign
heights, reduce visual clutter, create a more aesthetically pleasing
appearance to passing motorists and create more consistency between
signage. These code changes were in response to the increasing
urban character of the street scenes in Huntington Beach. In the
past, freestanding signs of 30 to 60 feet were erected to attract
motorists from miles away. However, today' s urban development is
too cluttered to allow for effective communication at this
distance. Lower signs within the motorist ' s direct cone of vision
are more easily seen and read.
In addition, electronic readerboards are incompatible with
residential uses . -The majority of parcels along Beach Boulevard are
approximately 300 feet deep and adjacent to residential uses . The
signs can be objectionable due to their glare and blinking.
However, new technology may reduce these impacts.
During consideration of previous Code Amendment No. 88-14, it was
suggested that, as a compromise, the applicant and staff investigate
the possibility of placing one electronic readerboard near the 405
Freeway. One sign, directed at freeway traffic, could then serve
all dealerships/businesses along Beach Boulevard, eliminating the
need for readerboards on properties south of the freeway. Staff has
investigated this possibility with CalTrans, and it does not appear
to be feasible. In order to place a sign within visual range of the
freeway, the product advertised on the sign must be located on the
same premises as the sign.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS:
Pursuant to the environmental regulations in effect at this time,
the Department of Community Development posted draft Negative
Declaration No. 89-15 for ten days, and no comments, either verbal
or written were received. The staff, in its initial study of the
project, has recommended that a negative declaration be issued.
Prior to any action on Code Amendment No. 89-6 it is necessary for
the City Council to review and act on Negative Declaration No.
89-15 . Staff feels that, should the requested code amendment be
approved, the suggested restrictions and criteria outlined in the
RCA 9-5-89 -4- (3440d)
attached draft ordinances will mitigate potentially adverse impacts
to a level that is not significant pursuant to CEQA Guidelines .
This does not mean, however, that all land use related impacts will
be completely eliminated, as discussed in the Analysis section of
this report.
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
The City Council may take one of the following alternative actions :
A. Approve Negative Declaration No. 89-15 and Code Amendment No.
89-6 as proposed by the applicant (Attachment No. 1 to August
1, 1989 Planning Commission Staff Report) , with findings; or
B. Approve Negative Declaration No. 89-15 and Code Amendment No.
89-6 as modified by staff (Attachment No. 2 to August 1, 1989
Planning Commission Staff Report) , with findings .
Should the City Council wish to approve the requested code
amendment, staff has prepared an alternative to the applicant ' s
proposed ordinance for consideration.
Staff ' s alternative would assure size and height compatibility with
other signs constructed since 1986 . A maximum 15 foot high,
100 square foot sign would allow for two or three lines of lighted
messages and full character graphics on a more proportionate scale.
A minimum 30 square feet of the sign would be devoted to permanent
business identification (maximum 70 square foot electronic
readerboard area) .
Below is. a summary of the features of the code amendment proposed by
the applicant (Ordinance No. -A) as compared to those features of
the alternative ordinance suggested by staff (Ordinance No. -B) .
Feature As Proposed by Applicant As Modified by Staff
Entitlements CUP, PSP, DRB CUP, PSP, DRB
Required
Type of Sign Freestanding or wall Freestanding or wall
Max. Number 1 per site 1 per site
Max. Size* 200 sq.ft. ; total sign 100 sq.ft. ; total sign
area not to exceed 2X area not to exceed 2X
size of readerboard size of readerboard
portion portion and min. 30 sq.
ft. permanent business
identification.
Max. Height* 35 ft. with min. 10 ft. 15 ft.
clearance
*Difference between suggested ordinances
RCA 9-5-89 -5- (3440d)
Feature As Proposed by Applicant As Modified by Staff
Max. Intensity Cylinders, shade screen Cylinders, shade screen
and photo cell required. and photo cell required.
Max. light output 5 ft. Max. light output 5 ft.
candles at property candles at property
line. line.
Min. Lot 200 ft. 400 ft.
Frontage*
Location Abutting freeway or Abutting freeway or
Beach Blvd. (except Beach Blvd. (except
between Adams and PCH) between Adams and PCH)
Min. Distance 150 ft . 150 ft.
between Electronic
Readerboards
Min. Distance 150 ft . 150 ft.
to Residence
Min. Distance 100 ft. 100 ft.
to Interior
Property Line
Type of No restrictions No restrictions
Business
Min. Parcel None specified None specified
Size
Hours of 6 :30 AM - 10 :30 PM 6 :30 AM to 10 :30 PM
Operation
Public Service 10% of message time or 10% of message time or
for emergencies for emergencies
Frequency of Min. 4 seconds with Min. 4 seconds with
Message min. 1 second interval. min. 1 second interval .
No continuous motion No continuous motion
or intensity changes . or intensity changes .
Other Signs One monument 7 ft. One monument 7 ft .
on Site high, 50 sq. ft. high, 50 sq. ft.
All other signs in All other signs in
conformance with conformance with
Article 961 Article 961
Temporary Permitted 6 months Prohibited
Banners* per calendar year in
accordance with
Article 961
*Difference between suggested ordinances
RCA 9-5-89 -6- (3440d)
Staff ' s alternative is basically designed within the framework of the
existing sign code. Based on staff ' s proposed locational criteria,
approximately 18 sites along Beach Boulevard and the freeway would be
eligible to apply for electronic readerboard signs . This does not
take into account possible lot consolidations to achieve the
suggested 400 feet of lot frontage. Any request to exceed these
standards would be based on a case by case analysis of the property
and use pursuant to a special sign permit (variance) .
Using the applicant ' s proposed locational criteria of 200 foot lot
frontage, approximately 53 sites along Beach Boulevard and the
freeway would be eligible for electronic readerboard signs . Again,
this does not take into account possible lot consolidations to
achieve the applicant ' s suggested lot frontage.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Letter of Appeal dated August 4, 1989
2 . Planning Commission Staff Report dated August 1, 1989 with
Attachments No. 1 through 9 .
MA:LP: lab
(3440d)
RCA 9-5-89 -7- (3440d)
• CITY
NEON SIGN COMA+ ram, p "ID�` INC.hie �I
707 E. ROSECRANS AVE. LOS ANGELES, CA 90059 (213) 327-1317 • (213) 321-4900 413&effid83SE NO. 253027
AUGUST 4, 1989
MS. Lora. Phillips
City of Huntington Peach
2000 Main Street
Huntington Peach, CA . 92648
Re: Roger Miller Honda - Code Amendment #CA-89-6
Dear Lora:
My client, Roger Miller Honda, and I Disagree with the Planning
C•otl7ttlission, decision -arid are hereby appealing the above mentioned
:ode Amendment to the City Council ,, to be heard at the August
21st, 1989 meeting .
Please Fend me a letter confirming that we will be heard on that
date .
Thank You
S' c rely .
Rocky ur r
Chief Neon Sign Co
.(CUE
-BC ZQ 7mi?i f %JZ `I t�
u Xllo U x s�i r.i G Az iEa'
• i
(37) Sign copy: any words, letters, numbers, figures, designs
or other symbolic representation incorporated into a sign for the
purpose of attracting attention.
(38) Sign structure: any structure which supports any sign.
(39) Site: one or more parcels of land identified by the
assessor ' s records . Where an integrated building development has �-
been approved or proposed, the site shall include all parcels of
-and contained within or a part of the development application. An
`ntegrated building development shall include all parcels served by
common access ways, driveways, parking and landscaping .
(40) Site (street) frontage: the length of a lot or parcel of
land along or fronting on a street.
(4`1) Subdivision directional sign: a sign providing direction
to a land development project pursuant to Vh�is article.
(42) Supergraphic: a painted design" which covers an area
greater than 10 percent of a wall, butir1ding facade, or other
structure. \
(43) Tem onary si n: any sign constructed of cloth, plastic,
paper or similar material displayed for a limited period of time !
outside a building.
(44) Trespassing sign: a sign which contains the following copy
only, "No trespassing
(45) Wall sign: an, sign which is attached or erected on the
exterior wall of a buiddinq including the parapet, with the display
surface of the sign Phalle� to the building wall, and which does
not project more than eighteen (18) inches from the building, or
project above the Weight of th wall or- parapet . °
(46) Window , ion: a sign in hick the name, address, phone
number, or hours of operation are plied directly to the window of
a business . (.Ord. 2832, 20 Aug 86
SECTION 5 . Section 9610 . 9(a) Temp rary Signs is amended as
follows :
9610 9 Miscellaneous provisions . (a) Temporary signs .
Tempora banners, flags, or pennants may b permitted for a maximum
of thr96 (3) times per year for a total of n' nety (90) days each
calendaar year to identify a special event suc as a grand opening or
anniversary sale. Approval shall be subject t the discretion of
the director for other events; however, a spaci event shall not
mean the occasional promotion of retail sales by business . A cash
bon to guarantee removal shall be required. Automobile dealerships
shall be subject to a six (6) month maximum time period provided a
planned sign program is approved prior to the display\Sites with
electronic readerboards shall be permitted a maximum of fifteen (15)
days per calendar year.
5 - � -
huntington beach department of community development,
ST'A F f
REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Community Development
DATE: August 1, 1989
SUBJECT: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 89-6/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 89-15
APPLICANT: Roger Miller Honda
19232 Beach Blvd.
Hunt. Beach, CA 92648
REQUEST: To amend Article 961 of the 'Ordinance Code to permit
electronic readerboard signs .
LOCATION: City-wide
1 . 0 SUGGESTED ACTION:
Deny Code Amendment No . 89-6 with findings .
2 . 0 GENERAL INFORMATION:
Code Amendment No . 89-6 and Negative Declaration No . 89-15
constitute a request to amend .Article 961 of the Huntington Beach
Ordinance Code (Sign Code) to permit the use of electronic
readerboard signs within the City' of. Huntington Beach. Currently,
Section 9610 .4 (a) of the Code prohibits "flashing, moving, pulsating
or intermittently lighted signs including searchlights; except
public service signs such as those for time and temperature. "
Section -9610 .4 (h) prohibits "changeable copy signs, including
electronic readerboards; except theatre marquees . " The requested
code amendment would amend these prohibitions to' exempt electronic
readerboards, add specifications and locational criteria for such
signs, and amend certain definitions to accommodate the
aforementioned changes .
In general, the applicant ' s requested ordinance would allow a
taller, larger sign than is currently permitted by code. The
maximum height for readerboards would be 35 feet instead of the 15
feet permitted for other types of signs and the maximum area
permitted would be 200 square feet instead of a maximum of 70 square
feet as currently permitted. The applicant proposes electronic
readerboards be considered for parcels with at least 200 feet of
frontage along the freeway and along Beach Boulevard (excluding the
portion of Beach Boulevard between Adams Avenue and Pacific Coast
Highway) . Various other locational and design criteria are proposed
as outlined in Section 4 . 0 of this report .
5
A-FM-23C
It is important to note that the applicant would not be the only
property owner eligible to apply for a readerboard should this code
amendment be approved. Rather, a number of businesses/property
owners along Beach Boulevard and the 405 Freeway would be eligible,
depending on the criteria proposed.
3 . 0 ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS:
Pursuant to the environmental regulations in effect at this time,
, the Department of Community Development posted draft Negative
Declaration No . 89-15 for ten days , and no comments, either verbal
or written were received. The staff, in its initial study of the
project, has recommended that a negative declaration be issued.
Prior to any action on Code Amendment No. 89-6 it is necessary for
the Planning Commission to review and action Negative Declaration
No . 89-15 . Staff feels that, should the requested code amendment be
approved, the suggested restrictions and criteria outlined in the
attached draft ordinances will mitigate potentially adverse impacts
to a level that is not significant pursuant to CEQA Guidelines .
This does not mean, however, that all land use related impacts will
be completely eliminated, as discussed in the Analysis section of
this report .
4 . 0 ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
A. Background:
1 . Code Amendment No . 87-15
Code Amendment No . 87-15 to permit electronic readerboard signs was
. proposed by Wilson Ford and was denied by the Planning Commission on
.March 28, 1988 . The City Council, on appeal by the applicant,
directed the Planning Commission to evaluate and make recommendation
upon an alternative ordinance to allow electronic readerboards,
subject to certain criteria, as recommended by the Planning
Commission Subcommittee and the Department of Public Works . On May
3 , 1988, the Planning Commission reaffirmed their previous action
and recommended denial of the code amendment to the City Council .
However, they also forwarded a list of recommended sign criteria for
the Council ' s consideration, should the Council have chosen to
approve the amendment . At the July 18, 1988 City Council meeting, a
motion to disapprove Code Amendment No . 87=15 failed by a vote of
3 to 3 . Therefore, the Planning Commission' s denial prevailed.
2 . Code Amendment No . 88-14 :
Code Amendment No . 88-14 to permit electronic readerboard signs was
proposed by Gary Gray-Huntington Jeep/Eagle, and was denied by the
Planning Commission on January 4 , 1989 . The City Council, on appeal
by Councilman Silva, considered the proposal on February 6, 1989 . A
motion to approve the Code Amendment failed by a vote of 3 to 3 and
therefore, the Planning Commission' s denial prevailed.
Staff Report - 8/1/89 -2- (0857D)
B. Analysis:
Proposed Code Amendment No . 89-6, as submitted by Roger Miller Honda
is identical to the previously proposed Code Amendment No . 87-15 .
There are four primary issues involved with the Code Amendment :
height, sign area, the concept of moving/changing message type
signs, and compatibility with other signs and surrounding land uses .
1 . Height :
From 1974 to 1986, the Sign Code permitted signs up to 20 feet in
height within 20 feet of the front property line. Signs up to 25
feet in height were permitted provided they were setback more than
20 feet from the front property line. The current code, adopted in
1986, limits sign height to 7 feet for parcels with less than 400
feet of frontage and to 15 feet for parcels with more than 400 feet
of street frontage. This code amendment -request is to allow signs
up to 35 feet in height for parcels with 200 feet of frontage, with
no front setback restrictions . This would be incompatible with
other signs in the City established since 1974 and contrary to the
current code.
2 . Size:
2'
Prior to 1986 , the size limit was based upon one square foot of sign
area per one lineal foot of lot frontage with maximum 100 square
feet for signs within 12 feet -of the front property line. A maximum
of 150 square feet was permitted for signs within 13 to 20 feet of
the front property line, and a maximum of 200 square feet for signs
greater than 20 feet from the front property- line. The varying
setback requirement in relation to size was to reduce the impact of
a large sign close to public streets . Freestanding signs are
currently limited to 70 square feet in size (80 square feet within
an opaque background) on parcels with over 400 feet of frontage, and
to 30 square feet (40 square feet within an opaque background, on
parcels with less than 400 feet of frontage. Due to the reduced
area of the signs, there is no minimum or varied setback requirement
from the front property line. Proposed Code Amendment No. 89-6 is
for a maximum 200 square foot sign area anywhere on the site (it may
be within the front 25 foot building setback area) provided the site
has a minimum 200 foot lot frontage. This size limit and location
is incompatible with other signs constructed along Beach Boulevard
since 1974 .
3 . Moving/Changing Type Signs :
Electronic readerboards may increase the risk of hazardous
distraction to motorists . Use of flashing signs for advertising is
visually demanding and may be confusing to drivers, thereby causing
slowing of traffic on arterial highways and increasing potential
vehicle/pedestrian conflicts . Electronic readerboard signs are more .
appropriate along freeways where the speed limit is 55 mph and there
is not a mixture of vehicle/pedestrian flow. Beach Boulevard is
posted maximum 45 mph and has sidewalks on both sides for pedestrian
use. A high sign coupled with moving/changing messages may increase
Staff Report - 8/1/89 -3- (0857D)
the potential of vehicle/pedestrian conflict . Staff recommends that
the use of flashing, blinking, pulsating, or intermittently lighted
signs be reserved for public safety, signalized intersections and
driving safety/control messages to motorists .
4 . Compatibility:
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 . The intent of the revised ordinance was to limit sign
heights, reduce visual clutter, create a more aesthetically pleasing
appearance to passing motorists and create more consistency between
signage. These code changes were in response to the increasing
urban character of the street scenes in Huntington Beach. In the
past, freestanding signs of 30 to 60 feet were erected to attract
motorists from miles away. However, today' s urban development is
too cluttered to allow for effective communication at this
distance. Lower signs within the motorist ' s direct cone of vision
are more easily seen and read.
In addition, electronic readerboards are incompatible with
residential uses . The majority of parcels along Beach Boulevard are
approximately 300 feet deep and adjacent to residential uses . The
signs can be obnoxious due to their glare and blinking . However,
new technology may reduce these impacts .
At the time that previous Code Amendment No . 87-15 was processed,
staff conducted a poll of all Orange County cities , and found very
few that permit electronic readerboard signs . There are a few
existing non-conforming signs , and some others allowed by variance.
Some of these signs are located on surface streets, however most
larger, taller electronic readerboard signs are adjacent to
freeways . An attached table lists the cities polled, their policies
on readerboards, and the location of existing readerboards within
those cities (Attachment No . 4) . Also attached is a table and map
citing samples of readerboards in Orange and Los Angeles Counties
(Attachment Nos . 5 and 6) .
C. Recommendation:
Staff is recommending denial of the requested Code Amendment based
on findings outlined by the Planning Commission in their denial of
Code Amendment No . 87-15 in May 1988, in their denial of Code
Amendment No . 88-14 in January 1989 , and the discussions herein.
The Planning Commission found that electronic readerboard signs
would serve to increase visual clutter along Beach Boulevard and
possibly throughout the City, impact adjacent residents with light
and glare, and allow possible distractions to motorists . Proposed
findings for denial are outlined in Section 5 . 0 of this staff report.
Staff Report - 8/1/89 -4- (0857D)
D, Alternative Action:
Should the Planning Commission wish to approve the requested code
amendment, staff has prepared an alternative ordinance for
consideration.
Staff ' s alternative would assure size and height compatibility with
other signs constructed since 1986 . A maximum 15 foot high, .
100 square foot sign would allow for two or three lines of lighted
messages and full character graphics on a more proportionate scale.
A minimum 30 square feet of the sign would be devoted to permanent
business identification (maximum 70 square foot electronic
readerboard area) .
Below is a summary of the features of the code amendment proposed by
the applicant (attached Ordinance No. -A) as compared to those
features of the alternative ordinance suggested by staff (attached
Ordinance No . -B) .
Feature As Proposed by Applicant As Modified by Staff
Entitlements CUP, PSP, DRB CUP, PSP, DRB
Required
Type of Sign Freestanding or wall Freestanding or wall
Max. Number 1 per site 1 per site
Max. Size* 200 sq.ft. ; total sign 100 sq.ft. ; total sign
area not to exceed 2X area not to exceed 2X
size of readerboard size of readerboard
portion portion and min. 30 sq.
ft. permanent business
identification.
Max. Height* 35 ft. with min. 10 ft. 15 ft.
clearance
Max. Intensity Cylinders, shade screen Cylinders, shade screen
and photo cell required. and photo cell required.
Max. light output. 5 ft. Max. light output 5 ft.
candles at property candles at property
line. line.
Min. Lot 200 ft. 400 ft.
Frontage*
Location Abutting freeway or Abutting freeway or
Beach Blvd. (except Beach Blvd. (except
between Adams and PCH) between Adams and PCH)
Min. Distance 150 ft . 150 ft .
between Electronic
Readerboards
*Difference between suggested ordinances
Staff Report - 8/l/89 -5- (0857D)
Feature As Proposed by Applicant As Modified by Staff
Min. Distance 150 ft . 150 ft .
to Residence
Min. Distance 100 ft . 100 ft .
to Interior
Property Line
Type of No restrictions No restrictions
Business
Min. Parcel None specified None specified
Size
Hours of 6 : 30 AM - 10 : 30 PM 6 :30 AM to 10 :30 PM
Operation
Public Service 10% of message time or 10% of message time or
for emergencies for emergencies
Frequency of Min. 4 seconds with Min. 4 seconds with
Message min. 1 second interval . min. 1 second interval .
No continuous motion No continuous motion
or intensity changes . or intensity changes .
Other Signs One monument 7 ft . One monument 7 ft .
on Site high, 50 sq. ft . high, 50 sq. ft .
All other signs in All other signs in
conformance with conformance with
Article 961 Article 961
Temporary Permitted 6 months Prohibited
Banners* per calendar year in
accordance with
Article 961
*Difference between suggested ordinances
Staff ' s alternative is basically designed within the framework of the
existing sign code. Based on staff ' s proposed locational criteria,
approximately 18 sites along Beach Boulevard and the freeway would be
eligible to apply for electronic readerboard signs . This does not
take into account possible lot consolidations to achieve the
suggested 400 feet of lot frontage. Any request to exceed these
standards would be based on a case by case analysis of the property
and use pursuant to a special sign permit (variance) .
Using the applicant' s proposed locational criteria of 200 foot lot
frontage, approximately 53 sites along Beach Boulevard and the
freeway would be eligible for electronic readerboard signs . Again,
this does not take into account possible lot consolidations to
achieve the applicant ' s suggested lot frontage.
Staff Report - 8/l/89 -6- (0857D)
In their consideration of previous Code Amendment No. 88-14, several
Planning Commissioners suggested that, as a compromise, the applicant
and staff investigate the possibility of placing one electronic
readerboard near the 405 Freeway. One sign, directed at freeway
traffic, could then serve all dealerships/businesses along Beach
Boulevard, eliminating the need for readerboards on properties south
of the freeway. Staff has investigated this possibility with
CalTrans , and it does not appear to be feasible. In order to place a
sign within visual range of the freeway, the product advertised on
the sign must be located on the same premises as the sign.
5 . 0 RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny Code Amendment No .
89-6 with the following findings :
FINDINGS FOR DENIAL:
1 . Since the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, Article 961, allows
adequate opportunities for advertising through various types of
signage, Code Amendment No. 89-6 to allow electronic readerboard
signs is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of
substantial property rights .
2 . Electronic readerboard signs, if permitted by Code Amendment No .
89-6 will be incompatible with surrounding existing and proposed
development, especially residential land uses .
3 . Electronic readerboard signs visible from City streets would
have the potential of slowing traffic and distracting passing
motorists .
4 . Code Amendment No . 89-6 to permit 35 foot high, 200 square foot
electronic readerboards would be incompatible with the majority
of existing signs constructed throughout the City since 1974 .
5 . Electronic readerboard signs as requested by Code Amendment No.
89-6 are more appropriate adjacent to freeways where there is
- not a mixture of vehicle/pedestrian flow, there is a greater
maximum speed limit, and less competition among signs .
6 . 0 ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
(A) The Planning Commission may approve Negative Declaration No.
89-15 and Code Amendment No . 89-6 as proposed by the applicant
(Attachment No . 1) , with findings; or
(B) The Planning Commission may approve Negative Declaration No .
89-15 and Code Amendment No . 89-6 as modified by staff
(Attachment No . 2) , with findings .
Staff Report - 8/1/89 -7- (0857D)
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft Ordinance proposed by applicant (No . -A)
2 . Draft Ordinance as modified by staff (No . -B)
3 . Negative Declaration No . 89-15
4 . Table - Orange County Cities - Sign Policies
5 . Table - Sample Electronic Readerboards
6 . Map of Sample Electronic Readerboards
7 . Sample Readerboard per applicant ' s criteria
8 . Sample Readerboard per staff ' s criteria
9 . Letters received
SH:LP: kla
Staff Report - 8/l/89 -8- (0857D)
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
AMENDING THE HUNTINGTON BEACH ORDINANCE CODE
SECTIONS 9610 . 4 , 9610 . 5 , •9610 . 9 AND 9610 . 10 TQ
ALLOW ELECTRONIC READERBOARD SIGNS
The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does
ordain as follows :
f
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
,rre.,aderboards and public service -signs such as those for
time and temperature .
(h ) Changeable copy . signs;
X&(j1j9X)6j6A.e X,j except electronic readerboards or theatre
marquees .
SECTION 2 . Section 9610 . 5 (Permitted Sign -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
El�CtLoni.
Re -gKds (See Section 9610 . 9 ( d ) for specifications )
- 1 -
# ' G''
SECTION 3 . Section 9610 .9 (Miscellaneous. Provisior�s.)
of this Huntington Beach Ordinance Code is ajmended to
incorporate the following :
(d) Electronic Readerboards , Electronic readerboards
��Y permlt,�edos rbiect to the approval of a' conditjonal use
Parn,; r by the Planning Commission , approval of. a planned slg�
program �c'cSrd��g�_ the prowisio'ns of. sect. ion 9410 . 6 and
,00roval of the Design Review Board according to the
Pr�oyi�gions of ArticicL 9Q5 Ar)F)roval of elc;c:tr. onic
riP�_ br�oa dd�._"all be subject to the following standards ;
Permitted sign_;
El, trenic readerboardsay be free standing or wall
tvpe signs .
Te maximum number of electronic readerboards shall
be one per site .
the Maximum sign area which includes an electronic�
,readerboa hall be two hundred ( 200 ) square -feet . The
total sign area shall he limited to _twice th.e size of the
electronic readerboard portion of t_he
The maximum htLght of -an electronic readerboard
shy, b_e__thirty-five�( 351 feeeYanddssh^ll have a minimum
around clearun�ce of tens ( 10 ) feet. .
The electronic readerboard shall have cylinders , a
Qhade screen andphotocell for ge�d� cing the intensity of .
li htinq at night .
The maximum measurable light output of the
,t-1gotrzonic readerboard shill not exceed -foot cand s at the
i)roperty line , t
cation requirements .
The minimum lot frontage of the parcel shall be two
h'u�d fed ( 200 ) feet ,
Electronic readerboards shall be allowed only on.'
parcels abuttiggga freeway and on parcels abutting,®Bea
Boulevard , excluding the portion along Li.ach_ 13oulevard
designated as a landscape corridor south of Adam_, ,A ve.Qu�, Ito
Pacific Coast Highway .
The minimum distance between electronic readerboards
shall be one buugd red fifty ( 150 )
III.t. Lnri Q i niu imdista�[Lc e _Lr WL aii..�_lc�
sign t:o anY residence shall be one hunuredi t�if tv_(.50 ) feet ,
Tw hQ jnninimum distance from ati. 1� �.:_t_r���� i_c ri_ a�derboard
to the interior property, l line shall L)i: uiic Iiund3r d_ 100 ) feet .
Other standards ,
In addition to the electronic readerboard si nr 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 readerboa®rd
shall be limited to 6 : 30 am to 10 , 30 pm ,
At least 101 of the message time , or any uercent_
deemed the city fo mQrqeogy
be used for publi , 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 messa es is not permitted ,
Ili ht 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 :
Electronic Readerboard : A chan eab.le
message sign consisting of a .-matrix of lamps which are
co_pu, er_ontrolled .
IMU ( 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 ,�eaderboards and those for t ' eiandJtApperature .
,(zj3X 17 ) ' Freestanding sign : (Text unchanged )
( 18 ) Grade : (Text .unchanged)
XXJ9 1191 Grand opening (Text unchanged )
X I ,(„ ,Q�, Ground level : (Text unchanged )
XX.0 ' (� Height of sign : (Text unchanged )
.22 Indirect illumination : (Text unchanged) '
,CzzX ,( 23 ) Industrial center : (Text unchanged )
(� Interior illumination : (Text unchanged )
,(hU 25 Item of information : (Text unchanged)
,(z�X IL61 Land development pro Zect : Text unchanged )
,CzBX J 27 Monument sign : Text unchanged )
3 —
r
Logo : (Text unchanged )
Nameplate sign : (Text unchanged)
3Q ) Nonconforming sign : (Text unchanged)
Open house sign : (Text unchanged )
Political sign : (Text unchanged )
Projecting sign : (Text unchanged )
34 ) Real estate sign : (Text unchanged )
Roof sign : (Text unchanged )
36 ) Si n : (Text unchanged )
Sign copy -. (Text unchanged )
w
( 38) Sign structure : (Text unchanged )
(. 9) Site: (Text unchanged )
0 ), Site ( street ) ;:frontage : (Text unchanged )
41 ) Subdivision directional sign: (Text
unchanged )
42 ) Supergraphic: ('next unchanged )
( 3) Temporary sign : (Text i.V-jkV9 d �
r
,(44-) Trespassing sign: (Text unchanged)
45 ) Wall sign: (Text .unchanged )
) Window sign: (Text unchanged )
PAGE END
4 -
SECTION �S . this" ordinance shall ta►c, effect thirty
days after it-s passage .
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council" of the City of
Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on
the day of , '198 : .
�4+
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Clerk C,itY Attorney
REVIEWED AND APPROVED: INITIATED AND APPROVED:
City Administrator Director of Community
Development
r
r "
. r
be "
5 _
r
•
ORDINANCE NO. � .
AN " ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HUNT_ING`i'ON BEACH
AMENDING THE HUNTINGTON . BEACH ORDINANCE ::CODE
SECTIONS 9610 . 4 , 9610 .51 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 Huuntington 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 r.eaderboards:
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 followingspeci:f'icat ions
pert"wining" to. :.41ectronic'_re.aderb oar ds :;:< • .
. (b) COMMERCIAL
Use-. of 'Sign.-: Type Maximum . : =.Maximum Maximum
:Number Area Per.:::. . Height..
Sign
Electronic
Readerboards ( See Section 9610 .9 (.d) for -specifications)
=SECTION. .3 Section 961,0._-9 .(Miscellaneous;°.P,r o.v. si:ons.).:`:=
.-"_
_ .
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 cohditio'nai use
permit by the Planning Commission, approval of -a ..planned sign
program according to the 'provisibns of section 9610 . 6 and
approval - of .the Design Re.v,iew Board according: to the
provisions of Article 985 . Approval of electronic
readerboards shall be subject to the following standards :
( 1 ) Permitted signs .
Electronic readerboards : may- be free standing or wall
type signs .
The maximum ..number of electronic .reade.rboards shall
be .one per site .
The maximum .sign , area which includes an electronic
readerboard shall be one.hundred. ''squate feet . The total sign
area shall be limited to .twice :the size of the electronic
readerboard portion of the sign .Mir ; 3p 04. .(Z+ o� 5'143rlaYGa• ,erYnar�eXl
The maximum height of .an electronic readerboard sign '�•d
shall be fifteen ( 15.),:.fe.et ..
The electro"nie-. 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" 50=foot candles 'at" the. p"roperty
dine .
( 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 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 distance from an electronic readerboard
to the interior property line shall be one hundred ( 100 ) feet .
( 3 ) Other standards .
In addition to the electronic readerboard sign, one
monument sign., 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
- 2
conformance. .wi.th .1he .. rovis.ion ..thi - - -
The 'ho.urs of- operation or-any -electroni7`r:eaderboard.'.�
:;'shall be limited '..to. 6 : 30 . am .to-.-l0 : 30::pm--At least' 10$ of the"-"message' time, or an
entage
deemed .necessary by the city :'for .emer;en6y condition_ ; shall ` .
be used for public service announcements .:-
Messages on .an electronic readerboard shall be no � .�.
faster than .one message every four_ seconds and the minimum O
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 . A
'"SECTION 4 . Section 9610 . 10 ( Definitions) of the
Huntington Beach Ordinance Code is amended as follows :
( 15 ) Electronic Readerboard : A changeable
message sign consisting of a matrix of lamps which are
computer controlled. �-
( 16 ) Flashing or . animated" sign : A sign
intermittently reflecting light ,, or which has any illumination
which is not maintained constanC in intensity, color or
pattern, except electronic r.eaderboards and those for time and'
temperature .
( 17 ) Freestanding sign : . (Text unchanged)
( 18 ) Grade : (Text unchanged)
( 19 ), Grand . opening : (Text unchanged) .
( 20 ) Ground level : . (Text unchanged )
( 21 ) Height of sign.: (Text unchanged) .
( 22 ) Indirect :illumination : (Text unchanged) '{
' ( 23 ) Industrial center : (Text unchanged) '`
( 24 ) Interior illumination: (Text unchanged)
( 25 ) Item of information : (Text unchanged)
( 26 ) Land development project-: Text unchanged),
( 27 ) Monument sign: Text unchanged )
( 28 ) Logo : . (Text unchanged )
( 29 ) Nameplate sign : (Text unchanged) .
(30 ) Nonconforming sign : (Text unchanged)
3 -
'ems
r - -
-
Y
I.
i
:
9
31 ` ::.0 en 'house s `ri` (Text;<unchan ed)
-=
y• ,. g
( 32 ) Political sign- (Text unchanged;)`
3 ) Project'ing sign : (Text unchanged) .'
( 34 ) Real estate sign: (Text unchanged )
(35 ) Roof sign : (Text unchanged ) "
( 36 ) Sign : (Text unchanged)
( 37 ) Sign copy : (Text unchanged )
F
Jr
( 38 ) Sign structure : (Text unchanged )
( 39 ) Site : . (Text unchanged )
( 40 ) Site ( street ) frontage : (Text unchanged )
( 41 ) - Subdivision directional sign : (Text
unchanged )
( 42 ) Supergraphic (Text unchanged )
( 43 ) Temporary sign : (Text unchanged )
( 44 ) Trespassing sign : (Text unchanged )
( 45 ) Wall sign : (Text unchanged )
( 46 ) Window sign : -.- (Text. unchanged )
PAGE :. END
• 1
- - 4 -
��� 2.
SECTION 5 'This ordinance shall take effect:-`=thirtysa
days after its passage . "-
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Cjuncil of the City of
Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on
the day of , 198 .
Mayor
ATTEST : APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Clerk City Ahtorn _
REVIEWED AND APPROVED : INITIATED AND APPROVED:
City Administrator Di�ecto ommunyty
Development
be
- 5 -
CITY OF .HUNTINGTON BEAC_ H
INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION::
HUNTINGTON BEACH
To Laura Phillips From ENVIRONMENTAL
Associate Planner RESOURCES SECTION
Subject ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION Date June 27, 1988
FORM NO. 89---15
Applicarft: Roger Miller Honda
19232 Beach Boulevard
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Request: Code amendment to allow electronic readerboards within the City of
Huntington Beach
Location: City of Huntington Beach along freeways and along Beach Boulevard,
excluding the portion designated as a landscape corridor from Adams
Avenue to Pacific Coast Highway.
Background
Staff has reviewed the environmental information form noted above and has determined
that a negative declaration may be filed for the project. In view of this, a draft negative
declaration was prepared and was published in the Daily Pilot and posted in the Office of
the City Clerk for a ten (10) day public review period commencing July 30, 1989 and
ending July 10, 1989. If any comments regarding the draft negative declaration are
received, you will be notified immediately.
Recommendation
The Environmental Resources Section recommends that the Planning Commission approve
Negative Declaration No. 89-15 finding that the proposed project will not have a
significant adverse effect on the environment.
Mitigation Measures
X The attached mitigating measures will reduce potential environmental effects
resulting from the project and are recommended as conditions of approval.
Respectfully submitted,
Kelly Main
Assistant Planner
KM:lab
(3019d-1)
Publish Date: 6/30/89
LEGAL ADVERTISEMENT
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES SECTION
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
Notice is hereby given by the Department of Community Development, Environmental
Resources Section of the City of Huntington Beach that the following draft negative
declaration request has been prepared and will be submitted to the City Planning
Commission for their consideration on August 1, 1989. The draft negative declaration will
be auazlable for public review and comment for ten (10) days commencing .Tune 30, 1989.
Draft Negative Declaration No. 89--15 (Code Amendment No. 89-6) is a request for an
amendment to the City of Huntington Ordinance Code, Article 961, to permit the use of
electronic readerboard signs within the City of Huntington Beach. Currently, Section
9610.4 of the code prohibits "flashing, moving, pulsating, or intermittently lighted or
changeable copy signs". The requested code amendment would amend the prohibitions to
except electronic readerboards, add specifications and location criteria for such signs, and
certain definitions to accommodate the aforementioned signs.
A copy of the request is on file with the City Clerk, City of Huntington Beach, 2000 Main
Street, Huntington Beach, California. Any person wishing to comment on the request may
do so in writing within 10 days of this notice by providing written comments to the
Department of Community Development, Environmental Resources Section, P.O. Box 190,
Huntington Beach, CA 92648.
(3069d)
----ram 1 L -J;�- :2,- 1,..
NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 89-15
I . Project Description
Code Amendment No . 89-6 and Negative Declaration No. 89-15
constitute a request: to amend Article 961 of the Huntington
Beach Ordinance Code (Sign Code) to permit the use of electronic
readerboard signs within the City of Huntington Beach.
Currently, Section 9610 .4 (a) of the Code prohibits "flashing,
moving, pulsating or intermittently lighted signs including
searchlights; except public service signs such as those for time
and temperature. " Section 9610 .4 (h) prohibits "changeable copy
.._signs, including electronic readerboards; except theatre
marquees . " The requested code amendment would amend these
prohibitions to exempt electronic readerboards, add
specifications and locational criteria for such signs, and amend
certain definitions to accommodate the aforementioned changes .
The request would allow electronic readerboards with the
following characteristics and requirements :
Applicant Recommendation
Issue (if approved)
Max. Sign Height 35 ft . with 10 ft .
ground clearance
Max. Sign Area 175 sq. ft.
Min. Lot Frontage 200 ft .
Min. Lot Area 2 acres
Type of Business 80% of merchandise in
outdoor display;
display/work areas must
be min. 20% of site area
II . Project Location
The Code Amendment would allow electronic readerboards along
freeways and along Beach Boulevard, excluding a portion designated
as a landscape corridor from Adams Avenue to Pacific Coast Highway.
Beach Boulevard is a highly developed commercial street . There are
residential neighborhoods directly adjacent to property which faces
Beach Boulevard.
(3095d)
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
(To Be Completed By Lead Agency)
I. Background
1. Name of Proponent Roger Miller Honda
2. .Address and Phone Number of Proponent (714) 936-1959
19232 Beach Boulevard, Huntington Beach, CA 92648
;r 3. Date of Checklist Submitted November 29, 1988
4. Agency Requiring Checklist City of Huntington Beach
5. Name of Proposal, if applicable Code Amendment No. 89-6 Environmental
Assessment No. 89-15
II. Environmental impacts
(Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets.)
Yes Maybe No
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes
in geologic substructures? X
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction
or overcovering of the soil? X
c. Change in topography or ground surface
relief features? X
d. The destruction, covering or modification
of any unique geologic or physical features? X
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of
soils, either on or off the site? X
f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach
sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or
erosion which may modify the channel of a
river or stream or the bed of the ocean or
any bay, inlet or lake? X
Yes Maybe No
g. Exposure of people or property to geologic
hazards such as earthquakes, landslides,
mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? X
2. Air. Will the proposal result in:
a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration
of ambient air quality? X
b. The creation of objectionable odors? X
c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or
temperature, or any change in climate,
either locally or regionally? X
3. Water. Will the proposal result in:
a. Changes in currents, or the course of
direction of water movements, in either
marine or fresh waters? X
b. Changes in absorption rates; drainage
patterns, or the rate and amount of surface
runoff? X
c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood
waters? X
d. Change in the amount of.surface water in
any water body? X
e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any
alteration of surface water quality, in-
cluding but not limited to temperature,
dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X
f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow
of ground waters? _ X
g. Change in the quantity of ground waters,
either through direct additions or with-
drawals, or through interception of an
aquifer by cuts or excavations? X
h. Substantial reduction in the amount of
water otherwise available for public water
supplies? X
i. Exposure of people or property to water
related hazards such as flooding or tidal
waves? X
Environmental Checklist -2- (3019d)
1
Yes Maybe No
4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or
number of any species of plants (including
trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic
plants)? _ X
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique,
rare or endangered species of plants? X
c. Introduction of new species of plants into
an area, or in a barrier to the normal
replenishment of existing species? X
d. Reduction in acreage of an agricultural
crop? X
5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or
numbers of any species of animals (birds,
land animals including reptiles, fish and
shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)? X
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique,
rare or endangered species of animals? X
c. Introduction of new*species of animals into
an area, or result in a barrier to the
migration or movement of animals? X
d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife
habitat? X
6. Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels? _ X
b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X
7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce
new light or glare? X*
8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a
substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area? X
9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural
resources? X
Environmental Checklist —3— (3019d)
Yes Maybe No
b. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable
natural resource? X
10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve:
a. A risk of an explosion or•the release of
hazardous substances (including, but not
limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals or
radiation) in the event of an accident or
upset conditions? X
b. Possible interference with an emergency
Fw response plan or an emergency evacuation
plan? X
11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location,
distribution, density, or growth rate of the
human population of an area? X
12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing
housing, or create a demand for additional
housing? X
13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal
result in:
a. Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement? X
b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or
demand for new parking? X
c. Substantial impact upon existing transpor-
tation systems? X
d. Alterations to present patterns of circula-
tion or movement of people and/or.goods? X_
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air
traffic? X
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? X*
14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an
effect upon, or result in a need for new or
altered governmental services in any of the
following areas:
a. Fire protection? X
b. Police protection? X
Environmental Checklist -4- (3019d)
� r
Yes Maybe No
C. Schools? X
d. Parks or other recreational facilities? X
e. Maintenance of public facilities, including
roads? X
f. Other governmental services? X
15. Energy. Will the proposal result in:
r" a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? X
b. Substantial increase in demand upon exist—
ing source of energy, or require the
development of sources of energy? X
16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need
for new systems, or substantial alterations to
the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas? X
b. Communication systems? X
c. Water? X
d. Sewer or septic tanks? X
e. Storm water drainage? X
f. Solid waste and disposal? X
17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in:
a. Creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazard (excluding mental health)? X
b. Exposure of people to potential health
hazards? X
18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the
obstruction of any scenic vista or view open
to the public, or will the proposal result in
the creation of an aesthetically offensive
site open to public view? X*
19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an
impact upon the quality or quantity of existing
recreational opportunities? X
Environmental Checklist —5— (3019d)
A.JTA _41-1-3�_)
Yes Maybe No
20. Cultural Resources.
a. Will the proposal result in the alteration
of or the destruction of a prehistoric or
historic archaeological site? X
b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical
or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or
historic building, structure, or object? X
c. Does the proposal have the potential to
,•� cause a physical change which would affect
unique ethnic cultural values? X
�4.
d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious
or sacred uses within the potential impact
area? X
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
a. Does the project have the potential to
degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish
or wildlife species, cause a fish or wild—
life population to drop below self sustain—
ing levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory? X
b. Does the project have the potential to
achieve short—term, to the disadvantage of
long—term, environmental goals? (A short—
term impact on the environment is one
which occurs in a relatively brief, defini—
tive period of time while long—term impacts
will endure well into the future.) X
c. Does the project have impacts which are
individually limited, but cumulatively con—
siderable? (A project may impact on two
or more separate resources where the impact
on each resource is relatively small, but
where the effect of the total of those
impacts on the environment is significant.) X
d. Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X
Environmental Checklist —6— (3019d)
III. Discussion of Environmental Evaluation
LIGHT AND GLARE
7. The proposed project has the potential to have significant impacts upon the
environment with respect to light and glare, particularly in the immediate vicinity
of any site which would be allowed to have a readerboard. Light projection from a
readerboard or several readerboards together onto adjacent residences could prove
to be quite severe without appropriate constraints upon height, size, sign frequency,
location and hours of operation.
The following mitigation measures are included within the proposed Code
Amendment and should reduce light and glare impacts from readerboards to a level
of,.insignificance:
'c* Height
A. The maximum height of an electronic readerboard shall be thirty-five (35) feet
and shall have a minimum ground clearance of ten (10) feet.
Size
B. The maximum sign area which includes an electronic readerboard shall be one
hundred seventy five (175) square feet.
Sign Frequency_
C. The maximum number of electronic readerboards shall be one per site.
D. The minimum lot frontage of the parcel shall be two hundred (200) feet.
Location
E. The minimum distance between electronic readerboards shall be one hundred
fifty (150) feet.
F. The minimum distance from an electronic readerboard to the interior property
line shall be one hundred (100) feet.
G. The minimum distance from an electronic readerboard sign to any residence
shall be one hundred fifty (150) feet.
H. 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
Highway.
Hours of Operation
I. Hours of operation shall be limited to 6:30 a.m. to 10:30 p.m.
To control the intensity of light projection from a readerboard:
Environmental Checklist -7- (3019d)
Intensity
J. Readerboards shall have cylinders, a shade screen and a photocell for reducing
the intensity of lighting at night.
K. Maximum measurable light output of the electronic readerboard shall not
exceed 5—foot candles at the property line.
With mitigation measures, no significant impacts are anticipated.
TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION
13f. Flashing, pulsating signs with messages have the potential to be a hazardous
_distraction to motorists. It is important to monitor sign frequency, the distance
,,
--between signs, and the rate at which messages are flashed. By monitoring these
factors, one is able to minimize the distracting elements of the proposed type of
sign.
The following mitigation measures are included in the proposed Code Amendment
and should reduce the impacts of readerboards upon traffic safety to a level of
insignificance:
Sign Frequency
Please refer to Measures C and D under Light and Glare.
Distance Between Signs
Please refer to Measure G under Light and Glare.
Message Frequency
L. Readerboard messages shall be no faster than one message every four seconds
and the.minimum interval between messages shall be at least one second.
The above measure is suggested by the California Department of Transportation
(Caltrans).
The requirement of a Conditional Use Permit for installation of an electronic
readerboard will allow the City to monitor the cumulative impacts readerboards
may have upon traffic safety.
In addition, the following measure is included in the proposed Code Amendment to
enhance traffic safety:
M. A minimum of ten (10%) percent of message time, or any percentage deemed
necessary by the City for emergency conditions, shall be used for public service
announcements.
With mitigation measures, no significant impacts are anticipated.
Environmental Checklist —8— (3019d)
AESTHETICS
18. Several factors including height, size, number, frequency, message type and location
will contribute to the aesthetic impacts electronic readerboards singularly and
cumulatively have on their neighborhoods.
If allowed, electronic readerboards must be limited to a size which is somewhat
harmonious with other signs in an area. Obviously, the shorter a sign and the
smaller its square footage, the less of a visual impact upon the street and adjacent
neighborhood. Measures A and B under Light and Glare address these concerns.
The distance between readerboards and the number of them visible on a street
effect the degree to which visual impacts will be experienced by traffic on the
subject street and by adjacent residences. The fewer the number of readerboards
�,,;�and the greater the distance between them, the lesser the aesthetic impact.
Mitigation Measures C and D address these concerns.
Limiting the location of readerboards, a commercial property and their distance
from residential property will reduce aesthetic impacts upon those properties.
Measures E, F and G under Light and Glare address these concerns.
Locating the signs on streets or along freeways where their presence will not appear
to be out—of—place or incompatible with the.surrounding environment will also
decrease aesthetic impacts resulting from electronic readerboards. Their limitation
to a portion of Beach Boulevard or along freeways and only on lots with relatively
greater street frontage address this concern.
Mandatory review through a Conditional Use Permit for installation of electronic
readerboards will contribute to lessening the negative aesthetic impacts associated
with allowing the proposed type of sign.
Wtih mitigation measures, no significant impacts are anticipated.
IV. Determination
(To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect
on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect
on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case X.
because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have
been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environ—
ment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
June 1. 1989
Date Signatur
For Environmental Review Committee
Environmental Checklist —9— (3019d)
�TT��A 3 L
ELECTRONIC READERBOARD SIGNAGE REQUIREMENTS BY CITY
ORANGE COUNTY
ERB Signs
Prohibited How ERB
City by Code Existing Signs Sian tted
Anaheim No Anaheim Toyota Building
Travel Lodge permits
Pac-Tel
Anaheim Hilton
Anaheim Convention Center
Embassy Suites
Bred Yes None
Buena Park Yes House of Imports Variance
Costa Mesa Yes Harbor plaza Planned Sign
Program
Fairgrounds Not under City
jurisdiction
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
� (l
ELECTRONIC READERBOARD SIGNAGE REQUIREMENTS 'BY CITY (Continued)
ERB Signs
Prohibited How .ERB
City by Code Existing Signs Sian Permitted
San Clements Yes Norte 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
f..
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
ELECTRONIC READEREOARD SIGNAGE REQUIREMENTS BY CITY (Continued)
i
OUTSIDE ORAN99 COUNTY
ERB Signs
Prohibited How ERB
S �x v_Cade EA sting Signs Sian Permitted
Long Beach Long Beach Convention
Center
Monrovia Yes Auto Mall Variance
Norwalk Yes Norwalk Toyota Sign Use Permit
r 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
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.it.
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 .
Size of Linef-
Electronic Approximate Ele4ro
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
f (Costa Mesa) 100 sq. ft.
!"`_=,-,i'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 (Pa.sadena)
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
..
Size of '� Lines of
Electronic Approximate Electronic
Business Location Box Heiaht_ Cove
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. An 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 ' 15 ' -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
Size of + Line�of
Electronic Approximate Electronic
Business Location Box Height Copy
Long Beach 300 E. Ocean n/a n/a n/a
Convention Center Blvd.
(Long E�ach)
*Freeway visibility
1
!le
P LF
, VA
0 .d•
v
��T''tlira--iw�i��Iij���TII��� �� •
Vp
am
IIAr•��vVi�fj-�1. � . � �,. �.
moo
Ran
io NFA
ql FA
-•rgIP
� , y
� I
-..._. _._...._ - ..._....._..._ ...._.-............ -
LF
3� t�oCaP.R
I LPO 5. : reaaerlx
rn
�a rn p
1'r
2�
C
Tom Bematz 8f Associates v�y
2914 East Katella Avenue
Suite 203
Orange, California 92667 1 `�� jr 4
(714) 997-1785
July 19 , 1989
Mike Adams
Huntington Beach Planning Commission
of Huntington Beach
P .%) . Boy: 190
Huntington reach, CA 92648 - RECEIVED
Re : Roger Miller, HONDA JUL 2 11989
Code Amendment N0 . 89-5/Neg .
Declaration NO . 89-15 DEPARTMENT Of
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
PLANNING DIVISION
Dear Mr . Adams ,
I ' m the orianal builder and oT.r7ner of the "Reach Place" retail
center at S .W.C . Beach Place and Terry Drive, Huntington Beach .
I ' ve just -repainted and remodeled the center .
Recently the city of Huntington Beach has forced me to destroy
my front pole sign in orderJfor. a new tenant to receive his
operating permit . My new frontlis a mere 7 foot tombstone .
If you ' re shrinking all the signs on Beach Boulevard, why should
Roger Miller Honda be treated differently . The sales generated
from my tenants is as good as Roger Miller ' s sales tax .
So I 'm opposed -to offering any other business special sign
consideration .
Det ' s continue to clean up Beach Boulevard . .Q..,
Ac
Sincerely,
Tom Bernatz
—Developers- Investors—
IERF(
RECEIVED
t:tTY CLER HUNTINGTON BEACH
HUNttk r
CITY OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES,. a
-'�dCN.G4tl:.
Luc 19 g �� Q�g AUG ?a 1988
P. 0. Box 190
August 21 , 1989 Huntington Beach, CA 9264$
Members of the City Council
Huntington Beach Civic Center
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
SUBJECT: CODE AMENDMENT REGARDING ELECTRONIC READERBOARDS
Ladies and Gentlemen ;
I see that once again the Huntington Beach City Council is
considering an ordinace change which seeks to allow electronic
readerboards along Beach Boulevard . I am opposed to the
amendment for the reasons outlined below.
1 . Electronic readerboards are by design an obnoxious form of
advertising .
The automobile dealers along Beach Boulevard presently have so
many banners, balloons, signs, and others attention getting
devices on their properties that the Council should consider an
ordinance requiring the clean up the lots rather than permitting
this additional form of visual pollution .
2. The Electronic readerboards boards will not increase sales
revenues to the dealers in Huntington Beach
I fail to understand how the addition of electronic readerboards
will help auto dealers in Huntington Beach better compete with
the auto malls as discussed by the dealers at earlier public
hearings. Advertisements along Beach Boulevard will create
business for one HB dealer only at the expense of another HB
dealer.
In closing I remind you that this is not an isolated request but
would pave the way for at least sixteen electronic boards all
along Beach Boulevard , and elsewhere in the city. I urge you
act responsibly and once again uphold the Planning Commission ' s
denial .
Sincerely,
Dean Allison
20362 Bridgeside Lane #203
Huntington Beach, CA 92646
1I.ofi1cd 10 Publish Of all krnr', including public
notices by Decree of the Suporror Court range County,
California. Number A-6214, dated 29 Sepi per. 1961• and -
A-24831, dated 11 June. 1963_ --
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
-"— PUBLIC NOTICE �
NOTICE OF
PUBLIC HEARING
County of Orange P..c.c ►01=6 A&I.o c-- nd APPEAL OF PLANNING
by n.8 orrea s •m in 7 rKar COMMISSION'S
—r 10 Po ccr,..r....es DENIAL OF CODE
AMENDMENT NO.
89-6 AND NEGATIVE
DECLARATION
NO.89-15
1 am a Citizen.of the Unjted States and a resident of (Electronic
Readerboard Signs)
the County aforesaid. I am over the age of eighteen NOTICE IS HEREBY
GIVEN that the Huntington
years, and not a party to'or interested in the below Beach City Council will hold
a public hearing In the Coun-
entitled matter. 1 am a principal clerk of the Orange cil Chamber at the Hunt-
Ington Beach Civic Center,
Coast DAILY PILOT. with which is combined the i 2000 Main Street, Hunt-
Ington Beach,California,on
NEWS-PRESS. a newspaper of general circulation. the date and at the time in-
dicated dicated below to receive and
printed and pubrtshed in the City of Costa Mesa. consider the statements of
all persons who wish to be
heard relative to the appli-
County of Orange. State of California. and that a cation described below.
Notice of Publ i C HPari n DATE/TIME: Tuesday,
g September 5,1989,7:00 PM
SUBJECT: Appeal-Code
Amendment No.
89-6/Negative Declaration
No.89-15
A P P L I -
of which copy attached hereto is a true and Complete CANT/APPELLANT: Roger
Miller Honda/Chief Neon
copy. was printed and pdblished in the Costa Mesa.. - Sign Company
LOCATION: (City-wide).
Roger Miller Honda- 19232
Newport Beach. Huntington Beach. Fountain Valley, Beach Boulevard. The re-'
Irvine. the South Coast communities and Laguna quested code amendmentwould apply to properties
1 time along Beach Boulevard and
Beach issues of said newspaper for the 405 Freeway.
REQUEST: Appeal of the
consecutive weeks to wit-the issue(s) of Planning Commission's de-
nial of Code Amendment
No.89-6 and Negative Dec-
laration No.89-15,a request
- to amend the City's Sign
Code to allow electronic
readerboard signs within
Au gii s t 25 ..198 9 Huntington Beach,
ENVIRONMENTAL
STATUS: This proposal is
covered by Negative Declar-
. 198 ation No. 89-15, which the
City Council will also con-
sider.
ON FILE: A copy of the
198 requested Code Amend-
ment, Negative Declaration
and appeal are on file in the
Department of Community
198 Development. Contact
Laura Phillips, Associate
Planner at 536-5271.
ALL INTERESTED PER-
. 198 SONS are invited to attend
said hearing and express
opinions or submit evidence
for or against theapplication
as outlined above.All appli-
cations, exhibits, and de-
1 declare, under penalty of perjury, that the scriptions of this proposal
foregoing is true and correct. are on file with the Office of
the City Clerk, 2000 Main
Stret, Huntington Beach;
California, for inspection by
the public.
Cv
HUNTINGTON BEACH
Executed on - AuQUSt 25 , 198 9 CITY COUNCIL
BY: Connie Brockway,
at Costa Mesa, California. City Clerk, Phone (714)
` 536-5227,Dated 8/22/89
Published Orange Coast
Daily Pilot August 25, 1989
F-708
Signature
P_100 OF NUDE ICt11ION
Publish 8/25/89
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION' S DENIAL OF
CODE AMENDMENT NO. 89-6 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 89-15
(Electronic Readerboard Signs)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will
hold a public hearing in the Council Chamber at the Huntington Beach
Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, on the
date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the
statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the
application described below.
DATE/TIME: Tuesday, September 5, 1989 , 7 : 00 PM
SUBJECT: Appeal-Code Amendment No . 89-6/Negative Declaration
No . 89-15
APPLICANT/APPELLANT: Roger Miller Honda/Chief Neon Sign Company
LOCATION: Roger Miller Honda - 19232 Beach Boulevard . The
requested code amendment would apply to properties
along Beach Boulevard and the 405 Freeway.
REOUEST: Appeal of the Planning Commission' s denial of Code
Amendment No . 89-6 and Negative Declaration No . 89-15 ,
a request to amend the City' s Sign Code to allow
electronic readerboard signs within Huntington Beach.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: This proposal is covered by Negative
Declaration No . 89-15 , which the City
Council will also consider .
ON FILE: A copy of the requested Code Amendment, Negative
Declaration and appeal are on file in the Department
of Community Development . Contact Laura Phillips ,
Associate Planner at 536-5271 .
ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and
express opinions or submit evidence for or against the application
as outlined above. All applications, exhibits, and descriptions of
this proposal are on file with the Office of the City Clerk, 2000
Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, for inspection by the
public.
HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY COUNCIL
By: Connie Brockway
City Clerk
Dated: 8/22/89 Phone (714) 536-5227
NOTICE TO: THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT
FROM: THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
THE AP LISTS FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT FOR
NOTIFICATION. MAILINGS BY THE CITY CLERK MUST BE
THE LATEST AVAILABLE Ito ACCORDANCE WITH DIVISION
T,HBOC REQUIREMENTS.
***
***PLEASE REMEMBER THAT THE LIST MAY HAVE CHANGED
SINCE THE MAILING FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING WAS SENT.
r
DATE '2 -�C7
I A URE ERI I ACY F LIST
T . '�
Publish 8/25/89
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION' S DENIAL OF
CODE AMENDMENT NO. 89-6 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 89-15
(Electronic Readerboard Signs)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will
hold a public hearing in the Council Chamber at the Huntington Beach
Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, on the
date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the
statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the
application described below.
DATE/TIME: Tuesday, September 5, 1989 , 7 : 00 PM
SUBJECT: Appeal-Code Amendment No . 89-6/Negative Declaration
No . 89-15
APPLICANT/APPELLANT: Roger Miller Honda/Chief Neon Sign Company
LOCATION: Roger Miller Honda - 19232 Beach Boulevard. The
requested code amendment would apply to properties
along Beach Boulevard and the 405 Freeway.
REQUEST: Appeal of the Planning Commission' s denial of Code
Amendment No . 89-6 and Negative Declaration No . 89-15 ,
a request to amend the City' s Sign Code to allow
electronic readerboard signs within Huntington Beach.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: This proposal is covered by Negative
Declaration No . 89-15 , which the City
Council will also consider .
ON FILE: A copy of the requested Code Amendment, Negative
Declaration and appeal are on file in the Department
of Community Development . Contact Laura Phillips ,
Associate Planner at 536-5271 .
ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and
express opinions or submit evidence for or against the application
as outlined above. All applications, exhibits, and descriptions of
this proposal are on file with the Office of the City Clerk, 2000
Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, for inspection by the
public .
HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY COUNCIL
By: Connie Brockway
City Clerk
Dated: 8/22/89 Phone (714) 536-5227
Publish 8/25/89
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF
CODE AMENDMENT NO 89-6 & NEGATI E DECLARATI N NO 89-15
any
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN tha the Huntington Beach City Council will
hold a public hearing in the Council Chamber at the Huntington Beach
Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, on the
date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the
statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the
application described below.
DATE/TIME: Tuesday, September 5, 1989 , 7 : 00 PM
SUBJECT: Appeal-Code Amendment No . 89-6/Negative Declaration
No . 89-15
APPLICANT/APPELLANT: Roger Miller Honda/Chief Neon Sign Company
LOCATION: ='ej:.t_y 11`A;le - "',.l ` ,"'.,
1
REOUEST: Appeal of the Planning Commission ' s denial of Code
Amendment No . 89-6 and. Negative Declaration No . 89-15 ,
a request to amend the City' s Sign Code to allow
electronic readerboard signs within Huntington Beach.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: This proposal is covered by Negative
Declaration No . 89-15 , which the City
Council will also consider ., ���"'"�"ic��
ON FILE: A copy of the requested Code Amendmentft3 appeal are
on file in the Department of Community Development .
Contact Laura Phillips, Associate Planner at 536-5271 .
ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and
express opinions or submit evidence for or against the application
as outlined above. All applications , exhibits , and descriptions of
this proposal are on file with the Office of the City Clerk, 2000
Main Street , Huntington Beach, California, for inspection by the
public .
HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY COUNCIL
By: Connie Brockway
City Clerk
Phone (714) 536-5227
(3440d-1)
r J
Y-
8/22/89
from the desk of:
CONNIE BROCKWA Y, CMC
CITY CLERK
(714) 536-5404
Laura,
In order to let the people we're mailing f
know why they are being mailed a notice
would you mind putting the location in
and checking the added wording.
Thank you,
Connie
I
I
P.O. BOX 190
HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648
Publish 8/25/89
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF
CODE AMENDMENT NO 89-6 & NEGATI E DECLARATI N NO 89-15
noa.`c 14A.n
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN tha(t the Huntington Beach City Council will
hold a public hearing in the Council Chamber at the Huntington Beach
Civic Center, 2000 Main Street , Huntington Beach, California, on the
date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the
statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the
application described below.
DATE/TIME : Tuesday, September 5 , 1989 , 7 : 00 PM
SUBJECT: Appeal-Code Amendment No . 89-6/Negative Declaration
No . 89-15
APPLICANT/APPELLANT : Roger Miller Honda/Chief Neon Sign Company
LOCATION: City-wide
REOUEST: Appeal of the Planning Commission ' s denial of Code
Amendment No . 89-6 and Negative Declaration. No . 89-15 ,
a request to amend the City' s Sign Code to allow
electronic read rboard signs within Huntington Beach . TARI
�i`' �t0�cc�,7,,q - o .e c.7� �,.� �f z �cf 3�y,.a a;�-' — ,4
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS : This proposal is covered by Negative
Declaration No . 89-15 , which the City 1
Council will also consider . (in� , iA.�
� f�v�
ON FILE : A copy of the requested Code Amendmen na Tappeal are
on file in the Department of Community Development .
Contact Laura Phillips , Associate Planner at 536-5271 .
ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and
express opinions or submit evidence for or against the application
as outlined above . All applications , exhibits , and descriptions of
this proposal are on file with the Office of the City Clerk, 2000
Main Street, Huntington Beach, California , for inspection by the
public .
HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY COUNCIL .
By: Connie Brockway
City Clerk
Phone (714) 536-5227
(3440d-1)
v
NOTICE TO: THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT
FROM: THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
THE AP LISTS FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT FOR
NOTIFICATION. MAILINGS BY THE CITY CLERK MUST BE
THE LATEST AVAILABLE II4 ACCORDANCE WITH DIVISION
3 HBOC REQUIREMENTS.
***
***PLEASE REMEMBER THAT THE LIST MAY HAVE CHANGED
SINCE THE MAILING FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING WAS SENT.
DATE
I A URE ERI I ACY F LIST
A,`Q
`} J• y' of Huntington Beach ^c:<
:�.'. P.O.BOX 190 CALIFORNIA 92648 k•';,�;.'>•;�� s: �; F, I ""•' 2
153-041-14
J.Shandrick
?x 6021 Doyle Dr.
%y HUntington Beach,Ca.92647
�a
."RE-TURN TO SENDE:R,
It C�1'It CLERK
J. City of Huntington Beach
G.-;,.s
P.O.BOX 19
Ot"w-..,�.` CALIFORNIA -i. �t'� , �, ` :i� [ �-��::� _ z •,
153-051-02,03,04,05.
Autoplex Hunt.
1� 19300.. :-Beach-Bl. -
HUntington Beach,Ca.92646 4`9,j. .
J P"
Mi
LlTZ cmRK
�.ni& City of Huntington Beach p._ P x �� n;
1:ay{
P.O.BOX 190 CALIFORNIA 92648 ,,F ,, r� 'c ,x ti� '89 �� —
;
C^� t
.�
025-182-14
G.Williams
101 Main S
` Ht�ntingt n Peach,Ca.92648
;f
KM CLERIC
_ + .nteCity of Huntington Beach _ ....,;_,s.�._.........a .�_. ,�;7orr�� ��� ;_4-�-_•r ���.-- � . ... _
;;] a .�'� �v`4�,'f`S.A•; \\� '.y\ — =vliJ ,., F.�J�_�y^,... '4; _ ...
P.O.BOX 190 CALIFORNIA92648 t"'''°"'" r S r� ft , AU G
�'
a:
153-024-31
-� L.Klingberg Jr.
I
p;� 22562 S. Canyon Lake Dr.
1,� pCanyon Lake,Ca.92380
�14.
�t
T
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
September 20, 1989
Chief Neon Sign Company, Inc.
Attn: Rocky Gruner
707 W. Rosecrans Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90059
Dear Mr. Gruner:
This is to advise you that the decision on your appeal filed on behalf
of Roger Miller Honda relative to Code Amendment No. 89-6, Negative Declaration
No. 89-15 has been continued to the City Council Meeting of October 2, 1989.
Sincerely,
Connie Brockway, City Cler
CB:kw
(Telephone: 714-536-5227)
.i
PROOF OF PUBLICATION This space is for the County Clerk's Filing Stamp
(20155 C.C.P)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA#
COUNTY OF ORANGE,
i
I am a citizen of the United States and a
resident of the County aforesaid;I am over the
age of eighteen years, and not s party to or
interested in the above-entitled matter. I am Proof of Publication of
the principal clerk of the printer of the
c
a newspaper of general circulation,printed and
published
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
in the Ci of �� APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL
OF CODE AMENDMENT NO.89-6&NEGATIVE
County of Orange, andIspaper
ch newspaper has DECLARATION N0.89-15
been adjudged a ne of general NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council
will hold a public hearing In the Council Chamber at the Huntington
circulation by the Superior Court of the County Beach Civic Center,2000 Main Street,Huntington Beach,California,on
the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the
of Orange,State of California,under the' statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the application
/(� ? described below.
date of V C �* 19iz DATEMME: Tuesday,September 5,1989,7:00 PM
SUBJECT: Appeal-Code Amendment No.89-6/Negative Declaration
Case Number S that the No.89-15
notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy APPLICANT/APPELLANT: Roger Miller Honda/Chief Neon Sign
(set in type not smaller than nonpareil), has Company
been published in each regular and entire issue LOCATION: City-wide
of said newspaper and not in any supplement REQUEST: Appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of Code
Amendment No.89-6 and Negative Declaration No.89.15,a request to
thereof on the following dates, to—wit: amend the Citys Sign Code to allow electronic readerboard signs within
Q Huntington Beach.
/ ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: This proposal is covered by Negative
Declaration No.89.15,which the City Council will also consider.
all in the year 19E. ON FILE: A copy of the requested Code Amendment and appeal are on
I certify penalty perjury ry file in the Department of Community Development. Contact Laura
(or declare) under enalt of t u Phillips,Associate Planner at 536.5271.
that the foregoing is true an COrreCt. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and
g $ express opinions or submit evidence for or against the application as
outlined above. All applications, exhibits, and descriptions of this
proposal are on file with the Office of the City Clerk,2000 Main Street, i
Date at Huntington Beach,California,for inspection by the public.
HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY COUNCIL
S By:Connie Brockway,
City Clerk
Califo nia, this day 19 Phone(714)536-5227
Publish in the Huntington Beach News Sept.1,1989.
Signature
Free copies of this blank form may be secured froth
California Newspaper Service Bureau, Inc.
Advertising Clearing House
P.O.Box 31 `
Los Angeles,CA 90053 (213)625-2541 \`
Please request GENERAL Proof of Pubhotion ,
when ordering thin form