HomeMy WebLinkAbout780-OB
DATE: July 18, 2011
TO: Planning Commission and City Council
FROM: Stephen C. Richardson, Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Consider a request for amendments to Chapter 28, Section
28.04.003, Sign Regulations, to allow animated electronic
reader board signs at schools
FILE: 780-OB
STAFF REPORT
The Planning Manager recommends the following:
1. Sec. 28.04.003(b)(1) be amended as follows:
(C) The sign shall not have flashing lights, any type
of intermittent illumination or revolve in any
manner, except as allowed below:
(i) Electronic reader board signs shall not be
permitted, except as an attachment to or a part
of a detached owner identification sign.
(ii) The message copy may change no more than once
every five (5) minutes.
(iii)Message copy shall not include any flashing,
flowing, alternating or blinking lights or
animation.
(iv) Message copy shall be one (1) color.
(v) As measured at the property line, the maximum
light emanation from a sign shall be no greater
than 0.2 footcandles.
(vi) Electronic reader board signs shall not be
permitted in an historic district.
(vii) Electronic reader board signs that are part
of a detached owner identification sign that serves
a public or private school shall be allowed to have
multiple colors.
2. Sec. 28.04.003(b)(3) be amended as follows:
(D) The sign shall not have any flashing lights, any type
of intermittent illumination or revolve in any
manner, except as allowed below:
(i) Electronic reader board signs shall not be
permitted if approved as part of the specific
use permit.
(ii) The message copy may change no more than once
every five (5) minutes.
(iii)Message copy shall not include any flashing,
flowing, alternating or blinking lights or
animation.
(iv) Message copy shall be one color.
(v) As measured at the property line, the maximum
light emanation from a sign shall be no greater
than 0.2 footcandles.
(vi) Electronic reader board signs shall not be
permitted in an historic district.
(vii) Electronic reader board signs that are part
of a detached owner identification sign that serves
a public or private school shall be allowed to have
multiple colors.
3. Sec. 28.04.003(c)(1) be amended as follows:
(C) The sign shall not have any flashing lights, any type
of intermittent illumination or revolve in any
manner, except as allowed below:
(i) Electronic reader board signs shall not be
permitted, except as an attachment to or a part
of a detached owner identification sign.
(ii) The message copy may change no more than once
every five (5) minutes.
(iii)Message copy shall not include any flashing,
flowing, alternating or blinking lights or
animation.
(iv) Message copy shall be one (1) color.
(v) As measured at the property line, the maximum
light emanation from a sign shall be no greater
than 0.2 footcandles.
(vi) Electronic reader board signs that are part of
a detached owner identification sign that serves a
public or private school shall be allowed to have
multiple colors.
4. Sec. 28.04.003(c)(5) be amended as follows:
(3) Electronic reader board signs shall be permitted in
the GC-MD, GC-MD-2, CBD, C-M, LI, HI and PD Districts
subject to the following conditions:
(A) The electronic reader board is to be attached
to or a part of a detached owner identification
sign.
(B) The message copy may change no more than once
every five (5) minutes.
(C) Message copy shall not include any flashing,
flowing, alternating or blinking lights or
animation.
(D) Message copy shall be limited to one (1) color.
(E) As measured at the property line, the maximum
light emanation from a sign shall be no greater
than 0.2 footcandles.
(F) No more than sixty (60) square feet of fifty
(50) percent of the maximum sign area, whichever
is less, shall be dedicated to electric
changeable copy.
(G) Electronic reader board signs that are part of
a detached owner identification sign that serves a
public or private school shall be allowed to have
multiple colors.
After a workshop with City Council and the Planning Commission
on June 20, 2011, City Council instructed staff to recommend
possible changes to the sign regulations that would allow school
owned electronic reader board signs to have message copy that
could flash, flow, alternate, blink or be animated. Staff was
also asked to research studies to determine what kind of
distractions, if any, animated signs might cause.
In determining staff=s recommendation, a number of studies were
reviewed. While most of the reports deal with electronic LED
billboards and their effects on driver distraction, those
findings can be extrapolated to apply to any type of electronic
LED reader board sign. Three specific studies that staff found
particularly useful are: The Impact of Driver Inattention on
Near-Crash/Crash Risk: An Analysis Using the 100-Car
Naturalistic Driving Study Data (April, 2006, National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation); Research Review of Potential Safety Effects
of Electronic Billboards on Driver Attention and Distraction
(September 11, 2001, Federal Highway Administration, U.S.
Department of Transportation); and Billboards in the Digital
Age: Unsafe (and Unsightly) at any Speed (Scenic America Issue
Alert 2 Electronic Signs).
Jerry Wachtel, who is often cited as A the expert @ in a number
of studies, is an engineering psychologist with over 25 years
of experience in the field of driver behavior. He says too
many variables contribute to traffic accidents to make it
possible to prove causality from a single source. He is quoted
as saying, A Most accidents are not caused by one thing, but
multiple things happening at once.@ According to Wachtel, cell
phones, navigational systems and DVD players constitute in-car
distractions, while billboards and other types of signs that
change messages, constitute external distractions. He says
that both internal and external distractions contribute to
traffic safety hazards that he believes are growing increasingly
worse.
Wachtel co-authored a report for the Federal Highway
Administration back in the 1980s, updated in 2001, which
concluded that A some studies showed a clear relationship between
the presence of outdoor signs and driver error or accidents
and other studies hadn=t shown anything.@
An analysis of The Impact of Driver Inattention on
Near-Crash/Crash Risk: An Analysis Using the 100-Car
Naturalistic Driving Study Data showed that taking one=s eyes
off the road for more than two seconds for any reason not directly
related to driving (such as checking the rearview mirror)
A significantly increased individual near crash/crash risk by
at least two (2) times that of normal, baseline driving @.
The Scenic America report states that on signs where messages
change often, drivers will look to see what is new. Traditional
signs become visual background noise for local drivers, and
thus have less safety impact; but electronic signs never blend
into the background. Interestingly enough, Scenic America
cites a voiceover narration of a promotional video from
Trans-Lux, which is a company that provides electronic
information displays for indoor and outdoor use, as saying
A Nothing=s as eye-catching as an electronic LED display. The
brightly-lit text and graphics can be seen from hundreds of
feet away, drawing the attention of everyone within view.@
The report, Research Review of Potential Safety Effects Of
Electronic Billboards on Driver Attention and Distraction,
reviewed existing literature related to electronic billboards.
The studies reviewed for this report leave a lot of unanswered
questions and a call for future research. However, one study
found germane to staff=s position deals with a Wisconsin DOT
report that found crash rates significantly increased on I-94
after a variable message advertising sign was installed
displaying sporting scores and advertisements and changed
images an average of twelve (12) frames per minute. The
Wisconsin DOT concluded from its analysis that the variable
message sign had an effect on traffic safety, notably an increase
in the rate of sideswipe crashes.
While there is some difference of opinion on whether electronic
reader board signs with moving images are a major distraction
to drivers, the Planning Manager takes the position that such
signs are just one more distraction that has to be dealt with.
To accommodate the arts and sciences, the Planning Manager
does recommend that such signs at public and private schools
be allowed multicolor signs but leave the rest of the sign
ordinance as is.
REFERENCES:
The Impact of Driver Inattention on Near-Crash/Crash Risk: An
Analysis Using the 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study Data
(April, 2006, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration,
U.S. Department of Transportation)
Research Review of Potential Safety Effects of Electronic
Billboards on Driver Attention and Distraction (September 11,
2001, Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation)
Billboards in the Digital Age: Unsafe (and Unsightly) at any
Speed (Scenic America Issue Alert 2 Electronic Signs)