HomeMy WebLinkAbout[06] Public Hearing, Special UseCM OF ST. J(XUPH Planning Commission Agenda Item 6
MEETING DATE: November 4, 2013
AGENDA ITEM: Public Hearing, Special Use Permit
Deutz Housing LLC, Billboard
SUBMITTED BY: Administration
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The existing billboard located on the property is grandfathered as a non
conforming use. The City has not allowed billboards for quite some time, but those that were
constructed prior to the change were allowed to remain as non - conforming. A representative of the
property owner (RHL) made application for a building permit to convert the existing sign from a static
sign to a digital sign. In checking with the City Attorney the change in face intensifies or changes the use
and would not be eligible for a building permit. On Wednesday, October 31, 1 had a discussion with RHL
and the only portion of the structure that will remain are the post. The conversion to digital utilizes the
existing poles and adds a cross beam on which the digital display is attached.
The use for the billboard intensifies as the current sign advertises for one entity at a time and is
considered a static display. The new sign has multiple advertisers and the entire sign is illuminated with
LED lighting. The size of the sign changes marginally, increasing by 65 square feet. The only provision in
the Ordinance that could be found that might be applicable is the provision under special use that
states: Uses which in the judgment of the Planning Commission and City Council are similar to those
listed in this zoning district.
The Planning Commission will have to determine if the request meets the criteria for special use and
determine the findings of fact. The provisions of the Non - Conforming Ordinance should also be
considered.
Included in the information is the zoning map illustrating that the property for which the billboard is
located is R1. Also included is information from the League of MN Cities on digital signs.
ATTACHMENTS: Request for Planning Commission Action
Hearing Notice
Letter denying building permit
Application Form
Zoning Map Extract
Applicable St. Joseph Ordinances
League of MN Cities Information
REQUESTED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Provide direction to staff on drafting findings of fact
either approving or denying the request.
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
-J,n�'�'\ CITY Of ST. JOSEPH
www.cityofstjoseph.com
Public Hearing
City of St Joseph
The St. Joseph Planning Commission shall conduct a public hearing on Monday, November 4,
at 7:10 PM at the St. Joseph City Hall. The purpose of the hearing is to consider a Special
Administrator use Permit replacing an existing billboard with a digital face. The property is legally described
Judy Weyrens as Lots 7 & 8 & E2 of West St, Blocks 2 & 3 Less HWY Block 2, Loso's 7h Addition, located at
320 Old Highway 52, St. Joseph, MN 56374,
St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.27 subd. 3(k) identifies uses which in the judgment of the
Planning Commission and City Council are similar to those listed In this zoning district.
Mayor
Rick Schultz All persons wishing to be heard will be heard with oral testimony limited to 5 minutes. Written
testimony may be submitted to the City Administrator, City of St. Joseph, PO Box 668, St.
Joseph, MN 56374.
Councilors
Steve Frank Mike Deutz, PO Box 639, St. Joseph, MN 56374 has submitted the request for a Special Use
Permit.
Bob Loso
Renee Symanietz Judy Weyrens
Dale Wick Administrator
Publish: October 22, 2013.
00DD 54.561410006
Fmtiwersera�r'�•`
SE
N,\
• � tit- -- _"7"---
.� :.
°1'
91.Sag6.0oo0 •� v
Note: MN Statute requires mailed notice to all property owners within 30 feet of a variance,
special use, interim use or rezoning request
25College Avenue North • PO Box 668 • Saint Joseph, Minnesota 56374
P h o n e 320.363.7201 F a x 320.363.0342
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH
http : / /mn- stioseph.civicpius.com
October 17, 2013
RHL, Inc..
25113 21 11 Ave
Administrator St. Cloud MN 56301
Judy Weyiens RE: Building Permit Application — Digital Sign
Dear Elaine:
Mayor
Rick Schultz The Building Official, Gary Utsch has reviewed the building permit application submitted by your
firm on behalf of Deutz Housing to reface an existing billboard with a digital face. The City zoning
ordinance does not allow any billboards within the City limits. The existing billboards are all
Councilors nonconforming uses.
Steve Frank
Bob Loso St. Joseph Code of Ordinance 52.08 Non - Conformance states:
Renee Symanietz
Dale Wick Subd. 4: Structural Change. No existing structure devoted to a non - conforming use shall
be enlarged, extended, reconstructed, moved, or structurally altered except in changing the use of
the structure to a conforming use.
Subd. S: Maintenance. Maintenance of a building or other structure containing or used for
a non - conforming use will be permitted when it includes necessary non- stt'w1ural repairs and
incidental alternations which do not extend or intensify the non - conforming building or use.
il
The intent behind nonconforming uses is to eventually phase out the nonconforming uses overtime.
The changes required to modify the existing wood frame billboard to a digital billboard would
increase the life of the billboard substantially, structurally alter the existing sign, intensify the use as
the display is currently static, and the digital sign would rotate and change.
Rather than deny the permit in totality, the property owner could make application for a Special Use
Permit to determine whether such a modification will be allowed. It is questionable whether a
special use permit is even allowed for such a modification, and it is up to your firm or the property
owners as to whether you want to pay the fees to pursue such a request.
For your convenience I have attached the full text of Ordinance 52.08 and an application for a
special use permit. Feel free to contact either the Building Official or myself at 363 -7201 if you
have additional questions.
Sincerely,
CITY OF ST. JOSEPH
ZZ�""
Vetrator
cc: Gary Utsch, Building Official
Tom Jovanovich, City Attorney
Z5 College Avenue North . PO Box 668 ' Soint Joseph, Minnesota 56374
Phone 3zo.363.7a01 Fax 3zo.363.034z
1W
APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT
City of St. Joseph
25 College Avenue N
PO Box 668
St. Joseph, MN 56374
Phone (320)363 -7201 or Fax (320)363 -0342
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
I
Fee $
Paid
Date
) ss
COUNTY OF STEARNS ) 1
NAME: Q � ✓fin L L Cs (Ifikg- „_)PHONE: ( 72d -z 3 '
ADDRESS: y EMAIL d'eqr GG / i V'2 - c% o rot
7-tv y L r ,4f led. cam.
I/We, the undersigned, hereby make the following application to the City Council and Planning Commission of the City of St. Joseph,
Stearns County, Minnesota. (Applicants have the responsibility of checking all applicable ordinances pertaining to their application
and complying with the ordinance requirements.)
1. Application is hereby made for a Special Use Permit to conduct the following:
2. Legal description of land to be affected by application, including acreage orsquare footage of land involved, and street address, ifany
(attach additional sheet if necessaty):
3 -20 of
3. Presentzoning of the above described property is: A
4. Name and address of the present owner of the above described property:
/A "Ite— /J KlFr --
Po BW 4,39
5. Is the proposed use compatible with the future and present land uses of the area? Please explain:
Yes (- No
rX,.5 - - / - 5? � r/.Aj 4
C
6. Will the proposed use depreciate the area in which It is proposed? Please explain:
r-.
Yes' No
7. Can the proposed use be accomodated with existing City service without overburdening the system? Please explain:
Yes r' No
8. Are local streets capable of handling traffic which is generated by the proposed use? Please explain:
Yes F No
Attached to this application, and made a part thereof, are other material submission data requirements, as indicated.
Applicant Signature: 6v�(� Date:
Property Owner Signature: Date: /� y r•3
Date application submitted: Date application completed:
Planning Commission Action: Recommend Approval r Recommend Disapproval Date of Action:
City Council Action: r Approved Disapproved Date of Action:
Date Applicant/Property owner notified of City Council Action:
B LACK = OLD FACE
PINK= NEW FACE �r�,.+.�4 New Over Old Layout
A
..
Existing Sign Size= 120 " x 288 " New Sign Size= 125" x 277"
• Auto Dim Brightness Adjust
• Reface Onto Existing Steel Poles (No Excavating)
• Fixed Ads (No Transition or Movement)
• Beautiful New Modern Look
Call Troy M. Rheaume for Questions (320) 492 -1934
New Layout
.fl _
+ a
_,.. Meats
Groceries
Produce
lie
t "
11. 11.
�� ..•vim:_ .�
i
SI GLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
O FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
MOBILE HOME RESIDENTAL
HIGHWAY BUSINESS '
GENERAL BUSINESS '
INDUSTRIAL '
®
PUBLIC '
AGRICULTURAL '
EDUCATIONAL AND ECCLeSIASTICAL
--- '-- - - - - --
ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE
Section 52.08: NON - CONFORMING USES
Subd. 1: Intent. It is not the intent of this section to encourage the non - conforming use
of land. Non - conformities are declared by this Ordinance to be incompatible with permitted uses
in the districts in which the non - conformity occurs. A non - conforming use of a structure, a
non - conforming use of land, or a non - conforming use of a structure and land in combination
shall not be extended or enlarged after passage of this Ordinance by attachment on a building or
land of additional signs intended to be seen from off the premises, or by the addition of other
uses of a nature which would be generally prohibited in the district in which such use is located.
Subd. 2: Continuation of Non - Conforming Use. Any nonconformity, including the
lawful use or occupation of land or premises existing at the time of the adoption of this
Ordinance may be continued, including through repair, replacement, restoration, maintenance, or
improvement, but not including expansion, unless
a. the nonconformity or occupancy ceases for a period of one year; or
b. the nonconforming use is destroyed by fire, collapse, explosion or acts of God, or
public enemy or other peril to the extent of 50 percent, or greater, of its market
value and no building permit has been applied for within 180 days of when the
property is damaged.
Any subsequent use or occupancy of the land or premises shall be a conforming use or
occupancy.
Subd. 3: Extension or Expansion of Non - conforming Use. A non - conforming use of a
residential, commercial or industrial building may not be extended or expanded by adding onto
the building. A non - conforming use of a residential, commercial or industrial land shall not be
enlarged, expanded, increased or extended to occupy a greater area than was occupied when the
use became non - conforming, except as specifically provided in Subd. 6 of this section.
Subd. 4: Structural Change. No existing structure devoted to a non - conforming use shall
be enlarged, extended, reconstructed, moved, or structurally altered except in changing the use of
the structure to a conforming use.
Subd. 5: Maintenance. Maintenance of a building or other structure containing or used
for a non - conforming use will be permitted when it includes necessary non - structural repairs and
incidental alterations which do not extend or intensify the non - conforming building or use.
Subd. 6: Residential Alterations. Alterations may be made to a residential building
containing non - conforming residential units when they will improve the livability and safety of
such units provided, however, that they do not increase the number of dwelling units in the
building. Additions may be made to non - conforming residential buildings, limited to an increase
in the living area of no more than 20% of the existing main floor square footage. The
construction and alteration of garages and accessory buildings is also permitted, as long as the
52.08 -1
ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE
improvements conform to the zoning requirements for both the zoned use of the property, and
the non - conforming use.
Subd. 7: Chance of Non - conforming Use. A non - conforming use cannot be changed to a
comparable non - conforming use. Whenever a non - conforming use has been changed to a
conforming use, or to a use permitted in a district of greater restrictions, it shall not thereafter be
changed to a non - conforming use of a less restricted district.
Subd. 8: Restoration After Destruction. Any non - conforming building or structure
damaged by fire, collapse, explosion or acts of God, or public enemy by:
A. more than fifty (50) percent of its market value (exclusive of foundations) as
appraised by an independent appraiser at the time of damage, shall not be restored
or reconstructed and used as before such a happening unless a building permit
has been applied for within 180 days after the property is damaged. The
reconstruction must be of like or similar materials or the architectural design and
building materials must be approved by the Planning Commission. Any
restoration permitted must be complete within twelve months of the happening.
If the City determines that more than 50% of the structure has been destroyed and
the property owner makes application for a building permit after the 180 day period the
following will apply:
i. If the property owner disputes the City's determination that more than
50% of the structure has been destroyed, he /she may, at his/her sole
expense, hire an independent appraiser to determine the market value and
present the appraisal to the City Council for reconsideration.
ii. If the City Council maintains its determination after receiving the
appraisal, the property owner shall have the right to appeal the City's
market value determination to the Board of Appeals and Adjustments.
Such appeal must be brought within thirty (30) days receiving the
appraisal.
B. less than fifty (50) percent of its market value above the foundation, it may be
restored, reconstructed or used as before provided that it is done within twelve
(12) months of the happening and that it be built of like or similar materials, or
the architectural design and building materials are approved by the Planning
Commission.
Subd. 9: Discontinuance of Non - Conforming Use. If a non - conforming use of a
building or land is discontinued or ceased for a period of one year or more, or if the use is
involuntarily discontinued and ceased because of the revocation of a permit or the right to
engage in the use, subsequent use of such building or land shall conform thereafter to the use
permitted in the district in which it is located.
Subd. 10: Junkyard. No junkyard may continue as a non - conforming use for more than
thirty (30) years after the effective date of this Ordinance, except that a junkyard may continue as
52.08 -2
ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE
a non - conforming use in an industrial district if within that period it is completely enclosed
within a building or within a continuous solid fence of not less than eight (8) feet in height or
other approved screening which screens completely the operations of the junkyard. Approval of
the fence or screen design shall be obtained from the Planning Commission.
Subd. 11: Signs. Signs pertaining to or advertising products sold on the premises of a
non - conforming building or use may be continued only when the non - conforming use is
permitted to continue and such signs shall not be expanded in number, area, height, or
illumination. New signs not to exceed the maximum allowed under Ordinance 52.11 may be
erected only after all other signs existing at the time of the adoption of this Ordinance have been
removed. New signs in conformity with the above may have illumination not to exceed 240
watts on one face of the sign, but flashing intermittent or moving illumination is not permitted.
Subd. 12: Buildings Under Construction and Building Permits Granted Prior to Adoption
of Ordinance. Any proposed structure which will, under this Ordinance, become
non - conforming but for which a building permit has been lawfully granted prior to the effective
date of this Ordinance, may be completed in accordance with the approved plans; provided
construction is started within sixty (60) days of the effective date of this Ordinance, is not
abandoned for a period of more than 120 days, and continues to completion within two (2) years.
Such structure and use shall thereafter be a legally non - conforming structure and use.
Subd. 13: Non - conforming Lots of Record. Where a lot of record exists within the City
which is vacant or built upon, but does not meet the lot requirements of the zone at the effective
date of this Ordinance, and the proposed or existing use is a permitted or permitted accessory use
for that zone, a building permit may be issued to build a new structure or reconstruct a destroyed
structure as outlined in Section 52.8.08; provided that yard setback requirements are met.
Subd. 14: Non - Conforming Lots. A single - family dwelling and customary accessory
building, notwithstanding limitations imposed by other provisions of this Ordinance, may be
erected in any district in which single - family dwellings are permitted on any single lot of record
at the effective date of adoption of or amendment to this Ordinance. Such lot must be in separate
ownership and not of continuous frontage with other lots in the same ownership. The provisions
shall apply even though such lot fails to meet the zoning requirements for area or width, or both,
that are generally applicable in the district, provided that yard dimensions and other requirements
not involving area or width, or both, of the lot shall conform to the regulations for the district in
which such lot is located. If, in a group of two (2) or more lots under the same ownership, any
individual lot does not meet the area and width requirements of this Ordinance, the lot must not
be considered as a separate parcel or land for the purpose of sale or development. The lot must
be combined with the one (1) or more contiguous lots so they equal one (1) or more parcels of
land, each meeting the area and width requirements of this Ordinance. Variances of area, width
and yard requirements shall be obtained only in accordance with Section 52.7, Subdivision 2 of
this Ordinance.
52.08 -3
ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE
Section 52.11: SIGNS
Section 52.11: SIGNS
Subd. 1: Findings. The City Council hereby finds as follows:
a) Exterior signs have a substantial impact on the character and quality of the
environment.
b) Signs provide an important medium through which persons may convey a variety
of messages.
c) Signs can create traffic hazards, aesthetic concerns and detriments to property
values, thereby threatening the public health, safety and welfare.
d) The city's zoning regulations include the regulation of signs in an effort to
provide adequate means of expression and to promote the economic viability of
the business community, while protecting the City and its citizens from a
proliferation of signs of a type, size, and location that would adversely impact
upon the aesthetics of the community and threaten the health, safety and welfare
of the community. The regulation of the physical characteristics of signs within
the City has had a positive impact on traffic safety and the appearance of the
community.
e) Regulations controlling "banners" are specifically set forth in Subd. 16 of this
Ordinance.
Subd. 2: Purpose and Intent. It is not the purpose or intent of this sign ordinance to
regulate the message displayed on any sign; nor is it the purpose or intent of this ordinance to
regulate any building design or any display not defined as a sign, or any sign which cannot be
viewed from outside a building. The purpose and intent of this ordinance is to:
a) Regulate the number, location, size, type, illumination and other physical
characteristics of signs within the city in order to promote the public health, safety
and welfare.
b) Establish standards which permit all persons the opportunity to display a wide
variety of messages; to preserve and protect the value of land, buildings and
landscapes and promote the attractiveness of the community; to ensure that signs
in the City are not a safety hazard to lives and/or property, to preserve order and
to encourage persons to erect permanent signs and discourage temporary and/or
portable signs.
52.11 -1
ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE
c) Improve the visual appearance of the City while providing for effective means of
communication, consistent with constitutional guarantees and the City's goals of
public safety and aesthetics.
d) Provide for fair and consistent enforcement of the sign regulations set forth herein
under the zoning authority of the City.
Subd. 3: Effect. A sign may be erected, mounted, displayed or maintained in the City if
it is in conformance with the provisions of this ordinance. The effect of this ordinance, as more
specifically set forth herein, is to:
a) Allow a wide variety of sign types in commercial zones, and a more limited
variety of sign types in other zones, subject to the standards set forth in this sign
ordinance.
b) Allow certain small, unobtrusive signs incidental to the principal use of a site in
all zones when in compliance with the requirements of this sign ordinance.
c) Prohibit signs whose location, size, type, illumination or other physical
characteristics negatively affect the environment and where the communication
can be accomplished by means having a lesser impact on the environment and the
public health, safety and welfare.
d) Provide for the enforcement of the provisions of this sign ordinance.
Subd. 4: Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Sign
Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the validity or
enforceability of the remaining portions of this Sign Ordinance. The City Council hereby
declares that it would have adopted the Sign Ordinance in each section, subsection, sentence, or
phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences,
clauses, or phrases be declared invalid.
Subd. 5: Definitions.
a) "Awning sign" — a building sign or graphic printed on or in some fashion attached
directly to the awning material.
b) "Balloon sign" — a sign consisting of a bag made of lightweight material
supported by helium hot or pressurized air which is greater than twenty four 24
inches in diameter.
c) "Banner" — attention - getting device which is of a nonpermanent paper, cloth,
vinyl or plastic like consistency used to promote a specific community event.
C) `Ballpark sign" — a sign (1) securely attached to the outfield fences of a ballpark,
(2) whose content can only be viewed from the `in -play' side of the fencing, (3)
whose size does not cause it to extend in any direction beyond the boundaries of
52.11 -2
ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE
the fencing that supports it, (4) that poses no danger of cuts or other injury to
persons using said ballpark for its intended purposes, and (5) that does not
otherwise interfere with persons using said ballpark for its intended purposes.
d) "Canopy" — a roof like cover often of fabric plastic metal or glass on a support
which provides shelter over a doorway.
e) "Flashing sign" — a directly or indirectly illuminated sign which exhibits changing
light or color effect by any means so as to provide intermittent illumination which
includes the illusion of intermittent flashing light by means of animation. Also
any mode of lighting which resembles zooming, twinkling or sparkling.
f) "Illuminated Sign" — any sign which has characters, letter figures, designs or
outline illuminated by electric lights or luminous tubes as part of the sign proper
or by indirect lighting.
g) "Marquee" — any permanent roof like structure projecting beyond a theater
building or extending along and projecting beyond the wall of that building
generally designed and constructed to provide protection from the weather.
h) "Monument sign" — a free standing sign in which the entire base of the sign
structure is in contact with the ground, providing a solid and continuous
background for the sign face that is the same width as the sign from the ground to
the top of the sign. The base of the sign shall be constructed of a permanent
material such as concrete block or stone. The sign face shall occupy at least 50%
of the monument sign. Signs should be constructed of materials either the same
as the principal structure or that appear the same.
i) "Off- premise sign" - a commercial speech sign which directs the attention of the
public to a business, activity conducted, or product sold or offered at a location
not on the same lot where such sign is located. For purposes of this sign
ordinance, easements and other appurtenances shall be considered to be outside
such lot and any sign located or proposed to be located in an easement or other
appurtenance shall be considered an off - premise sign.
j) "Pole sign" — see Pylon Sign.
k) "Pylon sign" — any freestanding sign which has its supportive structures anchored
in the ground and which has a sign face elevated above ground level by poles or
beams and with the area below the sign face open.
1) "Sandwich board sign" — any freestanding sign which is composed of two pieces
of flat, rigid material in the shape of a square or rectangle that are hinged at the
top and whose bottom edges rest on the ground so as to create a triangular shape
when being displayed.
52.11 -3
ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE
m) "Shimmering signs" — a sign which reflects an oscillating, sometimes distorted,
visual image.
n) "Temporary sign" — a sign that is not permanently affixed to the ground, a sign
that is not permanently affixed to any other permanent structure that is in turn
affixed to the ground, or a sign that is capable of being moved by mechanical or
non - mechanical means, including sandwich board signs.
o) "Wall" — any structure which defines the exterior boundaries or courts of a
building or structure and which has a slope of sixty (60) degrees or greater with
the horizontal plane.
p) "Wall sign" — any building sign attached parallel to, but within eighteen (18)
inches of a wall, painted on the wall surface of, or erected and confined within the
limits of an outside wall of any building or structure, which is supported by such
wall or building, and which displays only one (1) sign surface.
Subd. 6: Permit Required.
No sign shall be erected, altered, reconstructed, maintained or moved in the city without first
securing a permit from the city. The content of the message or speech displayed on the sign shall
not be reviewed or considered in determining whether to approve or deny a sign permit.
Application for a permit shall be in writing addressed to the zoning administrator and shall
contain the following information:
a) names and addresses of the applicant owners of the sign and lot;
b) the address at which any signs are to be erected;
c) the lot block and addition at which the signs are to be erected and the street on
which they are to front;
d) a complete set of plans, showing the necessary elevations, distances, size and
details to fully and clearly represent the construction and place of the signs;
e) the cost of the sign;
f) type of sign (i.e. wall sign, monument sign, etc.);
g) certification by applicant indicating the application complies with all
requirements of the sign ordinance; and
h) if the proposed sign is along a state trunk highway or interstate highway, the
application shall be accompanied by proof that the applicant has obtained a permit
from the state for the sign.
The zoning administrator shall approve or deny the sign permit in an expedited manner no more
than 60 days from the receipt of the complete application, including applicable fee. All permits
52.11 -4
ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE
not approved or denied within 60 days shall be deemed approved. If the permit is denied, the
issuing authority shall prepare a written notice of denial within 10 days of its decision, describing
the applicant's appeal rights under Section 525 15, and send it by certified mail, return receipt
requested, to the applicant.
Subd. 7: General Provisions. The following regulations shall apply to all signs hereafter
permitted:
a) Signs shall not be permitted within the public right of way or easements, except as
erected by an official unit of government or public utilities for the direction of
traffic or necessary public information, unless approved by the appropriate
government entity or as set forth in subd. 16 of this ordinance pertaining to
community event banners.
b) Signs shall not be constructed or maintained in a manner which obstructs traffic
visibility.
c) Flashing or rotating signs resembling emergency vehicles shall not be permitted
in any district.
d) No sign shall be placed that resembles any official marker erected by a
governmental agency or shall display such words as "stop" or "danger ".
e) No sign shall be permitted to obstruct any window, door, fire escape, stairway or
opening intended to provide light, air, ingress or egress for any building or
structure.
f) Where a sign is an illuminated sign, the source of light shall not shine upon any
part of a residence or into a residence district or any roadway.
g) One (1) sign, regardless of its type, shall be permitted on each parcel of property
in any residential district, and such signs shall be limited to an overall area of six
(6) square feet. The limitations stated in this provision can only be modified
according to Subdivision 14 of this Section.
h) The following types of signs are not permitted in any residential district:
1. Awning signs
2. Marquee signs
3. Balloon signs
4. Pole signs
5.
Canopy signs
6.
Pylon signs and
7.
Flashing signs
8.
Shimmering signs
9.
Wall sign
i) Pylon signs and off - premise signs shall not be permitted in any zoning district.
52.11 -5
ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE
j) No sign shall be of such a nature or placed in such a position that it will cause
danger to traffic on a street.
k) Signs which may be or may hereafter become rotted, unsafe or unsightly shall be
repaired or removed by the owner or lessee of the property upon which the sign
stands upon notice by the Building Inspector. The owner, lessee or manager of
any sign that contacts the ground and the owner of the land on which the same is
located shall keep grass, weeds and other growth cut and shall remove all debris
and rubbish from the lot on which the sign is located. If the owner, licensee or
owner of the property fails to act in accordance with this paragraph, the City may
remove the sign in question upon the direction of the City Council, and all costs
incurred for removal may be charged to the owner of the sign and if unpaid,
certified to the County Auditor as a lien against the property on which the sign
was located.
1) No sign shall project more than two (2) feet over a public sidewalk.
m) Signs shall not be located on the roof of a building.
n) No sign shall be painted directly on the side of the building, unless it is clearly
demonstrated to the Planning Commission, at the time that a permit for the sign is
applied for, that the location of the sign does not threaten the structural integrity
of the building in question, cause a safety hazard to any persons or property in the
vicinity of the building in question, and is aesthetically consistent with and non
offensive to the properties in the immediate area of the building in question.
o) No sign shall violate the side or rear yard setback requirements of the district in
which it is placed.
p) No sign shall exceed 250 square feet in surface area.
q) Except for monument signs and temporary signs, the surface area of the base of
any sign shall not exceed 25% of the face area unless structural engineering
illustrates the face cannot meet the wind loading requirements of the Building
Code.
r) Ballpark signs shall be allowed only on those ballparks that are primarily used to
host baseball and/or softball games.
Subd. 8: Temporary Signs.
a) Fee. A fee set forth by resolution applies to a permit for temporary or portable
signs.
52.11 -6
ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE
b) Maximum Size. The maximum size of a portable or temporary sign is sixty -four
(64) square feet. The maximum size of a portable or temporary sign in any
residential zoning district is limited to six (6) square feet.
c) Duration. The duration of time that a portable or temporary sign can be located
on a property is limited to forty (40) days in any one calendar year only after
application has been approved for location and placement.
d) Illuminated Signs. Illuminated signs, whether temporary or portable, shall have a
recognized seal of approval of listing from Underwriters Laboratories Inc. (UL)
or other recognized electrical standard and installed in conformance with the
listing or, if more restricted, the National Electrical Code as adopted by the State
of Minnesota.
e) One Sign Per Parcel. There shall be no more than one temporary or portable sign
per parcel of property. In the event that there are multiple tenants on a single
parcel of property on which temporary or portable signs are allowed, not more
than two portable signs shall be located on the parcel at any given time. One
portable sign will be allowed per strip mall site within the B -2 district.
f) Ground Fault Circuit Interpreters. The internal wiring of an illuminated outdoor
sign that is temporary or portable and readily accessible shall be supplied from,
and protected by, ground fault circuit interpreters.
g) Extension Cords. Extension cords used to supply power to portable or temporary
signs shall be enclosed in metal conduit or elevated at least nine (9) feet above the
ground to prevent tripping or electrical hazards.
h) Anchors. Anchors for portable or temporary signs shall be subject to approval by
the Building Inspector and maintained to prevent displacement or tipping over
during high winds.
Subd. 9: Exemptions. The following sign shall not require a permit. This exemption,
however, shall not be construed as relieving the owner of the sign from the responsibility of its
erection and maintenance, and its compliance with the provisions of this ordinance or any other
law or ordinance regulating the same. The exemption is as follows: The changing of the display
surface on a painted or printed sign only. This exemption, however, shall apply only to poster
replacement and/or on -site changes involving sign painting elsewhere than directly on a building.
Subd. 10: Permitted Signs; Business Districts.
a) Wall Signs. Each tenant other than those in multi -tenant buildings may have one
flat wall sign. Such signage may extend from the face of the roof over a covered
walk. Such wall signs shall not exceed 15% of the area of the wall to which the
sign is attached, to a maximum of 96 square feet.
52.11 -7
ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE
b) Monument Signs. Each tenant other than those in multi -tenant buildings may
have a monument sign that shall not exceed 80 square feet in surface area, and 15
feet in height, and is setback a minimum 20 feet from the property lines.
c) Multi -Tenant Wall Signs. Each tenant in a multi -tenant building may have a flat
wall sign. The aggregate area of such signs shall not exceed 5% of the area of the
wall to which they are attached.
d) Multi -Tenant Monument Signs. One monument sign shall be permitted for each
multi -tenant building provided the surface area of the sign does not exceed 100
square feet, per side, and 15 feet in height, and is setback in no case less than 20
feet from the property lines. The area may be increased to a maximum of 150
square feet per side for developments of over 20 acres.
e) Canopies and Awnings. The design of canopies shall be in keeping with the
overall building design in terms of location size and color. No canopies with
visible wall hangers shall be permitted. Signage on canopies may be substituted
for allowed building signage and shall be limited to 25% of the canopy area.
Internally - illuminated canopies must be compatible with the overall color scheme
of the building.
Subd. 11: Design Standards for Downtown and High Visibility Corridors.
a) Design Standards for B -1 Central Business District. The following standards
pertain to signs within the B -1 Central Business District and are in addition to,
and supersede, other standards contained herein.
Pylon and free - standing permanent signs are prohibited in the B -1 District
directly adjacent to Minnesota Street; except one monument sign may be
permitted per parcel of property provided the aggregate size of the
monument does not exceed one square foot for every one foot of frontage.
2. Signs shall be architecturally compatible with the style, composition,
materials, colors and details of the building to which it relates and other
signs on other buildings within the B -1 District.
3. Signage should be simple and the signage should not overshadow or
dominate the character of the structure. This provision applies only to the
design and appearance of the signage and not to the message contained
thereon.
4. Illuminated signs should feature indirect lighting that is shielded from
view unless ornamental in nature. Signs capable of being lit in the
evening should limit the view of such lights from motorists and
pedestrians.
52.11 -8
ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE
5. The overall design of all signage including the mounting framework shall
relate to the design of the principal building on the property. For buildings
without a recognizable style, the sign shall adopt the decorative features of
the building, utilizing the same materials and colors.
6. Signs painted directly on window glass or hung in windows are permitted.
Such signs shall be counted toward the maximum size requirement and
shall be limited to 20% of the window area.
7. The maximum height of a sign in a business district shall be 15 feet.
8. Projecting signs are allowed in the B -1 District directly adjacent to
Minnesota Street and College provided:
a) The projecting sign does not extend beyond the first floor of the
building.
b) No less than ten feet of clearance is provided between the highest
point of the sidewalk and the lowest point of the projecting sign.
C) Cumulative projecting sign area is not greater than twelve square
feet and maximum sign width not greater than three feet.
d) Maximum distance between a projecting sign and the building face
doesn't exceed one foot.
9. Sandwich Board Signs are allowed only in the B -1 District directly
adjacent to Minnesota Street and College provided:
a) No more than one sandwich board sign shall be allowed for each
tenant on a parcel of property.
b) The sandwich board sign does not exceed 36" in height or 30" in
width.
c) The sign is displayed only during normal operating hours of the
business on the parcel of property on which the sign is located.
d) The sign does not require any form of electricity or display lights
or moving parts.
e) That such signs do not block driveways, entryways or pedestrian
accesses, do not significantly occlude the sidewalk and/or do not
impact sightlines /view at street intersections.
f) The sign is made of weather and wind resistant materials of
superior quality.
52.11 -9
ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE
g) The sign is not affixed to the sidewalk, other signage or temporary
or permanent structure.
h) The maximum aggregate square footage of allowable sign area is
not exceeded.
i) The sign owner provides proof of liability insurance listing the
City as an additional insured and holding the City harmless at the
same time it applies to the City for a permit for the sign.
b) Design Standards for Properties with Highway /Freeway Visibility.
The following standards pertain to signs within the B -2 General
Business District, the B -3 District and Industrial Districts which
are visible from Interstate 94. These standards are in addition to,
and supersede, other standards contained herein.
The standards contained in this subdivision relate to signs on parcels
adjacent to or visible from principal arterials, minor arterials, and collector
streets.
2. Signs shall employ superior - quality, permanent materials. Natural
materials such as wood, brick, stone, glass, etc are highly encouraged.
3. Signs shall be architecturally compatible with the style, composition,
materials, color and details of the building to which it relates and other
structures within the applicable zoning classification.
4. Signage should be simple and non - obtrusive and should not overshadow
or dominate the character of any structure on the same parcel of property.
This provision applies only to the design and appearance of the signage
and not to the message contained thereon.
5. The use of natural color palettes in freestanding signage is highly desired.
6. All freestanding signs shall employ landscaping that is aesthetically
pleasing and complimentary to the quality of uses within the area.
Subd. 12: Non - Conforming Signs: Compliance. It is recognized that signs exist within
the zoning districts which were lawful before this sign ordinance was enacted, but will be
prohibited under the terms of this section. It is the intent of this sign ordinance that
nonconforming signs shall not be enlarged upon or expanded, nor be used as grounds for adding
other signs or uses prohibited elsewhere in the same district. It is further the intent of this sign
ordinance to permit legal nonconforming signs existing on the effective date of this sign
ordinance to continue as legal nonconforming signs provided such signs are safe, are maintained
so as not to be unsightly, and have not been abandoned or removed subject to the following
provisions:
52.11 -10
ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE
a) No sign shall be enlarged or altered in a way which increases its nonconformity.
b) If the use of the nonconforming sign or sign structure is discontinued for a period
of one year, the sign or sign structure shall not be reconstructed or used except in
conformity with the provisions of this ordinance.
C) Should such nonconforming sign or sign structure be damaged or structure be
destroyed by any means to an extent greater than fifty (50) percent of its market
value and all required permits for its reconstruction have not been applied for
within 180 days of when the sign or sign structure was damaged, it shall not be
reconstructed or used except in conformity with the provisions of this ordinance.
d) Should such sign or sign structure be moved for any reason for any distance
whatsoever, it shall thereafter conform to the regulations for the zoning district in
which it is located after it is moved.
e) No existing nonconforming sign shall be enlarged, expanded or moved except in
changing the sign to a sign permitted in the zoning district in which is it located.
f) When a parcel of property loses its nonconforming status all signs devoted to the
property shall be removed and all signs painted directly on any structure on the
property shall be repainted in a neutral color or a color which will harmonize with
the structure.
Subd. 13: Signs in Developing Subdivisions. During the development of a new
subdivision consisting of two (2) or more lots, there shall be allowed two (2) signs in the
subdivision, not to exceed twelve (12) feet in height. A fee is required to be paid for these signs,
as set by Council resolution. The City shall not review or consider the content of any message to
be displayed on such signs when determining whether to grant a permit. In addition to the signs
mentioned above, there shall be permitted one (1) sign not exceeding four (4) square feet, and
not more than six (6) feet in height, per lot in the subdivision. All signs allowed according to
this Subdivision shall be removed when 75 percent of the lots in the subdivision are fully
developed, or within two (2) years following the beginning of development in the subdivision,
whichever comes first. No signs allowed according to this Subdivision may be illuminated.
Subd. 14: Non - Commercial Speech. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this sign
ordinance, all non - commercial signs of any size may be posted in any number from August 1 in a
state general election year until ten (10) days following the state general election, and all signs
with a surface area of 50 square feet or less containing non - commercial speech may be posted
from eight (8) weeks prior to any special election until seven (7) days following the special
election. Signs permitted under this Subdivision shall be set back a minimum distance of no less
than fifteen (15) feet from the curb line, shall not be on any public right -of -way, and shall not be
permitted on school property or any other public lands.
Subd. 15: Substitution Clause. The owner of any sign which is otherwise allowed by this
sign ordinance may substitute non - commercial speech in lieu of any other commercial speech or
52.11 -11
ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE
non commercial speech. This substitution of copy may be made without any additional approval
or permitting. The purpose of this provision is to prevent any inadvertent favoring of
commercial speech over non - commercial speech or favoring of any particular non - commercial
speech over any other non - commercial speech. This provision prevails over any more specific
provision to the contrary.
Subd. 16: Banners. Upon application to the City, a banner may be permitted to be hung
across the right -of -way at the two specified locations designated by the City to promote local
community events only. This ordinance shall not be construed as authorizing any such signs or
banners on public property or on private property other than those specifically authorized by the
City.
a) Permit Required. No banner shall be erected, altered, maintained or
moved without first securing a permit from the City. The content of the
message or speech displayed on the sign shall be limited to promoting
community events and shall be reviewed or considered in determining
whether to approve or deny a banner permit. Application for a permit
shall be in writing addressed to the zoning administrator and shall
contain the following:
1. Names and addresses of the applicant(s);
2. The event the banner is meant to promote;
3. The location(s) at which any banner is to be erected;
4. The type and content of the banner;
5. A complete set of plans, showing the necessary elevations, distances,
size and details of the banner;
6. The cost of the banner;
7. Certification by applicant indicating the application complies with all
requirements of the banner ordinance; and
8. The dates the applicant(s) request the banner be present.
b) Approval by Planning Committee. Banner plans will be reviewed at
regular meetings by the Planning Committee. In addition, special
meetings can be requested for plan review. In reviewing the proposed
banner, the Planning Committee shall consider the following criteria:
1. Traffic circulation and pedestrian safety. Banners shall not contain
content or be placed in a manner to obstruct the safety of pedestrians,
motorists, cyclists, or other users of the public streets over which they
are to hang.
2. Sign Design and Visual Impact.
3. Construction and Maintenance. All banners must be constructed and
maintained by the applicant and must be done in a manner that results
in professionally finished appearance. All banners shall be constructed
in such a manner and of such material that they shall be safe.
52.11 -12
ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE
All permits not approved or denied within 30 days shall be deemed denied. If the
permit is denied, the issuing authority shall prepare a written notice of the denial
within 10 days of its decision.
C) Application Fee. The permit application fee is listed in Appendix A and
is due upon submission of the application.
d) Erecting and Removing Banner. Each applicant is responsible for
hanging and removing an approved banner. Roadway banners in
support of community events may be displayed for a period not to
exceed 21 days. All banners must be removed within 48 hours of the
scheduled event.
The use of the posts to hang a banner which promotes a community
event will be given to applicants on a first come, first serve basis.
e) Liability Insurance /Hold Harmless. Proof of liability insurance in
accordance with this subdivision shall be delivered to the City
Clerk/Administrator prior to issuance of the permit. The applicant must
demonstrate proof of financial responsibility with regard to liability
naming the City as an insured. The policy of insurance shall be in limits
of not less than one million per occurrence.
The liability insurance policy required by this subdivision shall provide that it may not be
cancelled for any cause, either by the insured or the insurance company without first giving
notice to the City in writing of intention to cancel it, addressed to the City Clerk/Administrator of
the City of St. Joseph.
f) Liability. The applicant(s) shall hold the City of St. Joseph harmless
from any and all claims and actions, litigations, and from damages
arising out of the erection, maintenance or removal of any banner
allowed under the authority of this ordinance nor shall the City of St.
Joseph be held liable for a claim based upon enforcement of this
ordinance.
g) Notice of Violation/Assessment of Costs. Notice of any violation of this
ordinance will be sent directly to the applicant(s) or to the party who
failed to submit an application in violation of this subdivision. Violation
of this ordinance is deemed a misdemeanor.
Section 52.11 amended 4/09
52.11 -13
ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE
Section 52.27: R -1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT
Subd. 1: Intent. It is the intent of this district to provide for the orderly development of
residential areas and to avoid urban sprawl within the City; permit the development of single
family dwellings; to provide reasonable standards for such development; to avoid overcrowding;
and to prohibit the use of land which would be incompatible with or detrimental to the essential
residential character of such districts.
Subd. 2: Permitted Uses.
a) Single family dwellings - non - rental occupancy.
b) Public parks and playgrounds.
C) Horticulture, not to include the retail sale of products.
d) Licensed residential group care facility with 1,300 feet between it and a similar
facility and not to exceed six boarders.
e) Licensed day -care facility serving 12 persons or less.
Subd. 3: Uses Under Special Use Permit. The following uses shall require a Special Use
Permit based on the procedures set forth in this Ordinance:
a) Governmental and public utility buildings and structures necessary for the health,
safety and general welfare of the community.
b) Public or semi- public recreational buildings and community centers.
c) Licensed day -care centers serving 13 or more persons.
d) Licensed residential group care facilities with seven or more boarders.
e) Public libraries.
f) Public and private schools provided that the location and off - street parking has
been reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission.
g) Institutions of a religious eleemosynary or philanthropic nature.
h) Nurseries and greenhouses.
52.27 -1
ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE
i) Planned use residential development.
j) Bed and breakfast.
k) Uses which in the judgment of the Planning Commission and City Council are
similar to those listed in this zoning district.
Subd. 4. Permitted Accesso Uses.
a) Private garages, parking spaces and carports for passenger cars, trucks, recreational
vehicles and equipment.
b) Structures used for storage of domestic equipment and non - commercial recreational
equipment.
c) Swimming pools, tennis courts, detached screen porch or gazebo, provided that
the maximum lot coverage requirement is not exceeded. All swimming pools
must be fenced around the perimeter. The fence must meet the requirements of
Ordinance 52.12 subd. 2.
d) No accessory building nor structure shall be constructed on any lot prior to the
time of construction of the principal building to which it is accessory.
e) Fences.
f) Home occupations per Section 52.16.
g) Accessory building(s) and/or private garage(s), either attached or detached, shall be
subject to the following limitations, and the general requirements of Section 52.12,
Subd. 1.
One or two accessory buildings covering a combined area not greater than 1,350
square feet are permitted.
2. The combined area of the lot covered by the accessory buildings authorized in
subparagraphs 1 above shall not exceed ten (10) percent of the total lot area.
3. Accessory buildings must meet the following design standards:
A. Pole barns and/or post frame construction is prohibited.
B. The exterior finish materials (such as siding, shingles, etc.) shall be
similar in nature and color to the exterior finish material of the principal
structure.
C. The side walls of the structure may not exceed ten (10) feet in height.
52.27 -2
ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE
D. The roof slope shall be no greater than the steepest roof slope of the
principal structure, nor less than the average of the roof slopes of the
principal structure.
4. No accessory building nor structure shall be constructed on any lot prior to
the time of construction of the principal building to which it is accessory.
5. Accessory buildings not specifically permitted by this paragraph shall be
prohibited unless authorized by a special use permit granted pursuant to
Ordinance 52.07.03. For purposes of this section, a pet shelter or a
structure designed and used exclusively for play by children shall not be
considered an accessory building.
Subd. 5: Interim Uses. The following are Interim Uses allowed by permit based upon the
procedures and criteria set forth in Section 52.07.04 of this Code.
a) Residential rental provided the unit is owner - occupied and provided the room(s)
rented does not contain separate kitchen facilities and is not intended for use as an
independent residence. For purposes of establishing if the property is owner
occupied, the owner must be a natural person, and all owner occupy the property
as their principal residence. The owners may not exceed two in number. For
purpose of determining ownership, the owner /owners must provide a copy of a
recorded deed or recorded contract for deed. A purchase agreement will not be
accepted as evidence of ownership. In addition,
The property must satisfy the parking requirements contained in this
Ordinance.
2. The rental unit(s) must:
A. Have a ceiling height of at least seven (7) feet;
B. Contain adequate ventilation and fire escapes as determined by
the Building Official; and,
C. Meet all applicable rental codes as outlined in St. Joseph
Ordinance 55 and Ordinance 55.06, Subd. 1.
Section 52.27, Subd. 5 amended 4/08
b) Residential Rental provided the property owner is relocating and the dwelling has
been actively for sale on the market for at least three months. For purposes of
establishing if the property is owner occupied, the owner must be a natural
person, and all owner (s) occupy the property as their principal residence and have
for at least two years. The owners may not exceed two in number. For purpose
of determining ownership, the owner /owners must provide a copy of a recorded
deed or recorded contract for deed. A purchase agreement will not be accepted as
52.27 -3
ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE
evidence of ownership.
For the purpose of determining applicability, the property owner must provide a
copy of the current listing agreement, with a licensed realtor, showing the
property, is currently being marketed. In addition,
1. The property must satisfy the parking requirements contained in this
Ordinance.
2. The rental unit(s) must:
A. Have a ceiling height of at least seven (7) feet;
B. Contain adequate ventilation and fire escapes as determined by
the Building Official; and,
C. Meet all applicable rental codes as outlined in St. Joseph
Ordinance 55 and Ordinance 55.06, Subd. 1.
3. Conditions of the Interim Use Permit
A. If granted, the Interim Use Permit shall have a term of one year,
which can be renewed for one additional one year. The property
owner must make application for renewal and complete the rental
license process as well.
B. Under no circumstances shall the Interim Use Permit extend
beyond two years and a renewed Interim Use Permit will expire
and the end of the two year period.
Section 52.27, Subd. 5 (b) New 02113
Subd. 6: Lot Area Requirements.
a) Minimum Area: 20,000 square feet where municipal sanitary sewer and water
services are not available.
b) Minimum Area where served by municipal sewer and water: 11,000 square feet.
c) Average width of not less than 75 feet and an average depth of not less than 125
feet.
Subd. 7: Setback Requirements.
a) Front yard setbacks of not less than 30 feet on all public right -of -ways, unless:
30 percent or more of the frontage on the same side of the street between
two intersecting streets is improved with buildings that have observed a
52.27 -4
ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE
greater or less depth of front yard in which instance no new building or
portion thereof shall project beyond a straight line drawn between the
point closest to the street line of the residence upon either side of proposed
structure or,
2. If there are residences upon only one side, then beyond the straight line
projected from the front of the nearest residences.
3. Nothing in this regulation shall be interpreted to require a front yard of
more than 50 feet.
4. Where the street is curved, the line shall follow the curve of the street
rather than to be a straight line.
b) Side yard setbacks shall be ten (10) feet from the property line for the main
structure and any garage or accessory structure. Where the side yard abuts a
public right of way, the side yard setback shall be thirty (30) feet from the main
structure and any garage or accessory structure.
Section 52.27, Subd. 7b amended 1/07
C) Rear yard shall have a depth of not less than 20 percent of the depth of the lot.
d) No part of the structure including footings, soffits, gutters or other overhangs shall
encroach on easement areas.
Subd. 8: Height Requirements.
a) No building shall exceed 22 stories or shall it exceed 35 feet in height. Berming
the building does not allow a building to be constructed higher than 35 feet.
Elevation for the building shall be determined by the average grade of the land.
Subd. 9: Site Coverage.
a) No structure or combination of structures shall occupy more than 30% of the lot
area.
b) Impervious surfaces shall not exceed 50% of the lot area. Impervious surfaces
shall include all structures, parking spaces and driveway connecting the parking
space with a street or alley.
Section 52.27, Subd. 9 amended 1/07
Subd. 10: Signs.
a) In R -1 Single Family Districts the following requirements shall apply to all signs:
52.27 -5
ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE
No sign shall be placed closer than ten feet (10') to any property line,
except directional signs which have a zero foot (0') setback.
2. No sign shall be placed in any interior side yard
3. No sign shall be mounted on the roof of a building.
4. No signs shall violate the front, side or rear yard requirements.
5. Signs shall not be placed in the public right -of -way or easements.
6. Flashing or rotating signs resembling emergency vehicles shall not be
permitted.
7. Illuminated signs are not allowed.
b) No advertising or business signs shall be permitted, except signs advertising a
permitted home occupation limited to an overall area of six (6) square feet.
c) The following temporary signs shall be allowed and are subject to the same
provisions in Subd. 2 (a — c) and are limited to an overall area of six (6) square
feet.
Campaign
2. Garage Sale
3. Real Estate
d) One unlighted sign having a surface area not exceeding fifty square feet (50') per
face with an aggregate total of one hundred (100) square feet and a height not
exceeding eight feet (8') per vehicle entrance identifying each subdivision or
housing development. Such signs are subject to the following provisions:
Landscaping must be provided around the base of the sign.
2. The entrance to a development shall be one that abuts a collector or
arterial road.
e) Sign Removal. All signs not maintained and kept in good repair or in non
compliance of the St. Joseph Code of Ordinances shall be subject to removal upon
direction of the City Building Inspector.
Subd. 11: Yard Cover. Every yard on a premise on which a dwelling stands shall, within
3 months of issuance of a certificate of occupancy, be provided with lawn or combined lawn
52.27 -6
ORDINANCE 52 — ZONING ORDINANCE
cover of vegetation, gardens, hedges, shrubbery, and related decorative materials and such yards
shall be maintained consistent with prevailing community standards. If a certificate of
occupancy is issued between the months of November and April, the 3 month period shall begin
to run on May 1 st.
Subd. 12: Additional Requirements. Uses may be subject to additional requirements
contained in this Ordinance including, but not limited to the sections governing parking, home
occupation, floodplain, signs, etc.
Subd. 13: Regulation of Activities Adjacent to Wetlands.
a) The following activity shall be subject to a 50 foot setback from wetlands: The
construction or maintenance of a building attached to a foundation, including but
not limited to, pole buildings. For purposes of this paragraph, pump houses,
moveable storage sheds, recreational docks and storm water or erosion control
devices shall not be considered buildings.
b) The following activity shall be subject to a 75 foot setback from wetlands: The
construction or maintenance of paved driveways or areas designed for the parking
of a vehicle or trailer.
c) The following activities shall be subject to a 100 foot setback from wetlands:
The construction or maintenance of a well used for agricultural irrigation,
or any well less than 50 feet in depth.
2. External storage of materials used in conjunction with industrial or
commercial processing or manufacturing.
3. The storage of waste or refuse generated by industrial or commercial
activities.
4. The construction or maintenance of a septic system.
52.27 -7
v
HAGUE of CONNECTING & INNOVATING
MINNESOTA SINCE 1915
CITIES
REGULATING DYNAMIC SIGNAGE
Executive summary
Cities have authority and responsibility to regulate dynamic signs as appropriate for each
community. There is no single correct approach to regulation. Because the regulation of signs
involves the First Amendment, courts hold sign regulations to a higher standard than most land use
regulations. Cities still have considerable discretion to regulate, as long as they do so reasonably
and without regard to sign content.
Introduction
In the fall of 2006, a number of Minnesota cities were surprised by the appearance of large
electronic billboards akin to giant television screens. These signs are the next generation of sign
displays with the ability to feature changing images and movement —known collectively as
dynamic signs. Attempts to regulate them resulted in litigation in at least one community -
Minnetonka. In developing a regulatory response, Minnetonka partnered with the League of
Minnesota Cities to commission a study, conducted by SRF Engineering, on the impact of such
dynamic signs on traffic safety. This memorandum discusses the legal framework of regulating
dynamic signage in light of the recent litigation and study.
Regulatory framework
While the federal and state government can enact and have enacted laws regulating signs, those
regulations only provide minimum standards. Courts have explicitly recognized that cities have the
ability to regulate signs, including dynamic signs, more restrictively.
There is no uniform system of regulation that cities must follow. Each community is different and
has different needs that local ordinances may reflect. Such regulations must meet the same basic
legal tests for all sign regulation.
Most city land use decisions get a very deferential standard of review known as rational basis
review. Under this level of review, city decision will be upheld if they have any rational basis.
Because sign regulations implicate free speech rights which are protected by the First Amendment,
they are subjected to higher levels of scrutiny. The highest level of scrutiny, called strict scrutiny,
applies when government tries to regulate based on the content of speech. The only content -based
sign regulation that courts have upheld is treating off - premise signs (billboards) differently than
on- premise signs that advertise the business on the same property.
One distinction that may seem like it is content based, but our federal court of appeals has said is
not, is a ban on dynamic signs with an exception for time and temperature displays. The court held
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 10UNWARiM Mg. WWr r11oa(681)181- -1100 is(MI)181- -1198
INSURANCE TRUST R b►ui. M MUS-2m munn (8= 921 -1122 waWWWimcm
that because of their unique nature, allowing only time and temp displays is not a prohibited
content -based regulation. It is important not to overstate this, however. Regulations that go further
and carve out a broader exception for "public information" are likely to be struck down as
impermissibly content - based.
Sign regulations that are not content based are subject to intermediate scrutiny, which tests
whether the regulation is substantially related to a significant government interest. This roughly
translates to "regulate for a good reason." Cities should take care that the scope of the regulation is
not excessive when viewed in light of all of the regulatory objectives, and that they do not create
exceptions to the regulations that cannot be justified by reference to one or more of the city's
articulated objectives
Big - picture regulatory tools
The available research on traffic impacts supports significant content - neutral limits or even bans
on dynamic signs for safety reasons. The studies confirm that billboards can tend to distract
drivers, dynamic features contribute to the distraction, and even short distractions can increase the
risk of accidents. This is not surprising as promotional materials put out by sign companies
themselves boast the signs' ability to hold viewer attention as a benefit of dynamic signs.
Safety is only one concern. Cities may also regulate signs based on values, preferences, and
aesthetics. Not every sign is appropriate in every community or every neighborhood. Not every
community wishes to become Las Vegas or even downtown Minneapolis.
Cities can take a number of different macro -level approaches to regulation. Some examples
include:
1. Complete or near - complete bans that do not allow dynamic signs at all.
2. Allow dynamic signs with restrictions such as minimum display time, allowing only a
percentage of a sign to change, or text size limitations.
3. Allow different things in different zoning districts, such as allowing brighter dynamic signs in a
downtown business district than in residential neighborhoods.
4. Offering incentive programs to billboard companies to allow dynamic signs in exchange for
removal of non - conforming static signs.
5. Encourage dynamic displays. Some communities like the clean, new look of dynamic signs and
encourage them to remove old blighted and poorly maintained signs.
Regulating sign aspects
A content - neutral regulation that regulates dynamic signage will be subject to intermediate
scrutiny, so a community must show a regulation is substantially related to a significant
government interest. In plain language, you must articulate what problem a regulation is intended
to address and how the regulation addresses it.
There are at least six aspects of dynamic signs that regulations may address:
1. Duration of messages/ speed of changeover. Studies have described the Zeigarnik effect, a
psychological need to see a task through to its end. In the case of dynamic signs, a driver's desire
to read an entire message before it changes or to complete a scrolling message has been shown to
2
negatively impact drivers' tendencies to maintain a constant speed or remain in a lane. To address
these issues, many cities have imposed minimum message durations that might vary depending on
community preference and traffic conditions.
2. Motion, animation, and video. Motion can range from simple visual effects to full realistic
video. Motion can extend the period of time a driver will keep watching a sign, increasing
distractedness. Cities may prohibit motion or limit it either to specific areas or to specific
characteristics such as a motion time frame calibrated to traffic speed.
3. Brightness. Brightness can be a safety factor, particularly at night, as sudden brightness can be
distracting or diminish night vision. A number of communities limit brightness based on time of
day and by color displayed. This can be difficult to quantify and measure.
4. Sign placement and spacing. The number of signs and their location can be a big factor in
driver awareness. A large number of signs can increase distractedness. Poorly placed signs may
block views or cause distraction in unsafe areas. Cities may impose site standards and spacing
requirements. These may present regulatory challenges as spacing may be dependent on the
actions of neighboring property owners.
S. Size of signs. Size can have impacts in several ways. Too big, and it obstructs views and
distracts. Too small, and it takes longer to read and encourages sign users to sequence messages.
Cities may limit dynamic signs or the percentage of a sign that can be dynamic.
6. Text size and legibility. Signs that are difficult to read invite increased driver focus. Regulations
can, for example, require minimum sizes based on road speed.
The specifics of how to regulate each of these aspects is up to each community. Because review of
regulations must face intermediate scrutiny, cities have to take some extra steps when drafting and
adopting ordinances.
For each aspect regulated, cities should consider adopting findings or local studies that articulate
the reason and any support for the regulation. The SRF study and other materials can provide a
scientific basis for a number of regulatory steps. In addition, cities may choose more stringent
regulation in order to take a conservative approach to protecting safety.
Moving forward
It is recommended that cities think about dynamic signs as early as possible. Regardless of your
city's approach, it is better to make a rational choice rather than by having dynamic signs arrive
before you have thought about the issue. Once the signs are up, Minnesota's nonconforming use
law arguably grants them "grandfathered" status, with a narrow exception for safety.
If your city would like more information about regulating dynamic signs, Paul Merwin, LMCIT
Senior Land Use Attorney, can provide assistance and refer you to more information and
resources. Contact Paul at (651) 281 -1278 or pmerwin(a,lmc.org.
Disclaimer: This memorandum is intended as general information only and should not be read as
legal advice or as creating an attorney - client relationship. This memo addresses general concerns
and has not been reviewed in the context of a specific client or situation. This memo was drafted as
a loss control document and is intended to avoid conflicts rather than form an opinion as to the
legality or defensibility of any action.
Last updated: 7 -26 -07
4
Regulating dynamic signage
LMC Search Tools
LMCIT Home
OSHA /Safety
Assistance
Claims
Reporting
Page 1 of 2
LMCIT
League of Minnesota
Insurance Trust
Regulating dynamic signage
Download information:
- -LMCIT Memo: Regulating Dynamic Signage (pdf)
- -SRF Consulting Group: Impact of Dynamic Signs on Traffic
Safety (pdf)
-- Disclaimer (pdf)
Employee
Benefits
Cities and electronic billboard technology
Cities have authority and responsibility to regulate dynamic signs
Property
Casualty
as appropriate for each community. There is no single correct
approach to regulation. Because the regulation of signs involves
Workers'
the First Amendment, courts hold sign regulations to a higher
Compensation
standard than most land use regulations. Cities still have
considerable discretion to regulate, as long as they do so
Loss Control
reasonably and without regard to sign content.
LMCIT Library
In the fall of 2006, a number of Minnesota cities were surprised
Conference by the appearance of large electronic billboards akin to giant
Registration television screens. These signs are the next generation of sign
Staff Directory displays with the ability to feature changing images and
movement -- known collectively as dynamic signs. Attempts to
regulate them resulted in litigation in at least one community --
the city of Minnetonka.
In developing a regulatory response, Minnetonka partnered with
the League of Minnesota Cities to commission a study, conducted
by SRF Engineering, on the impact of such dynamic signs on
traffic safety.
Questions?
If you have questions or need additional information, please
contact:
. LMCIT Senior Land Use Attorney Paull Merwin.
Phone: (651) 281 -1278 or (800) 925 -1122.
E -mail: pmerwin @lmc.org.
City Tools I Legislative Advocacy I Research & Analysis LMCIT I
HR & Benefits I Library I Training & Conferences Other Services
Hn I Cite FP- 1Y11YPC R Tinc I M—i.1 \NPh Cite Pnlirioc
http:// www .Imnc.org/hncit/signstudy.cfin 9/25/2007
"DYNAMIC" SIGNAGE:
RESEARCH RELATED TO DRIVER DISTRACTION
AND
ORDINANCE RECOMMENDATIONS
Submitted by
SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
Prepared for
City of Minnetonka
June 7, 2007
Al
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
1.0 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................... ............................... 1
2.0 PURPOSE OF STUDY AND METHODOLOGY ..................... ............................... 1
3.0 SELECTED RESEARCH FINDINGS ....................................... ...............................
2
3.1
Expert Opinions .............................................................. ...............................
3
3.2
Billboards: a Source of Driver Distraction? .................... ...............................
4
3.3
"Dynamic" Billboards: an Additional Source of ........... ...............................
6
Driver Distraction?
3.3.1 Other Information ............................................... ...............................
9
3.4
How Much Distraction Is a Problem? ............................. ...............................
10
3.5
How Does "Brightness" Affect Driver Distraction? ....... ...............................
15
3.6
Billboard and Other Signage Regulation: a ................... ...............................
16
Minnesota Perspective
3.7
Billboard and Other Signage Regulation: Other ............ ...............................
16
Perspectives
4.0 SUGGESTED REGULATORY APPROACH ........................... ...............................
19
4.1
Definitions ....................................................................... ...............................
19
4.2
Types of Regulatory Measures ....................................... ...............................
19
4.2.1 Complete or Partial Prohibition of Electronic Signs ..........................
19
4.2.2 Size Limitations on Electronic Signs .................. ...............................
20
4.2.3 Rate -of- Change Limitations on Electronic Signs ..............................
20
4.2.4 Motion, Animation, or Video Limitations on Electronic Signs.........
21
4.2.5 Sign Placement and Spacing ............................... ...............................
22
4.2.6 Text Size ............................................................. ...............................
22
4.2.7 Brightness Limitations on Electronic Signs ........ ...............................
23
4.3
Public Review ................................................................. ...............................
24
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..................... ............................... 25
Appendix A — Current Sign Technologies
Appendix B — Outdoor Advertising Sign Brightness Definitions
Appendix C — Electronic Outdoor Advertising Device Visual Performance Definitions
142
LIST OF TABLES
Page No.
Table 1: FHWA Reanalysis of Faustman's Findings ....................... ............................... 5
Table 2: Crash Causation Summary .. ...............................
11
Table 3: Percentage of CDS Crashes Involving Inattention- ........... ............................... 12
Distraction Related Crash Causes
Table 4: Specific Sources of Distraction Among Distracted Drivers: ............................ 12
Table 5: Telespot Sign Crash Rates - Expressway Southbound ...... ............................... 13
Table 6: Telespot Sign Crash Rates - Expressway Northbound ........ ............................... 14
Table 7: Number of New Messages Displayed at Various Driver Speeds and ............... 21
Time Intervals Between Messages
LIST OF FIGURES
Page No.
Figure 1: VicRoads' Ten Point Road Safety Checklist ..................... ............................... 18
;tA3
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This study was precipitated by concerns raised by the City of Minnetonka, Minnesota in regard
to the installation of two LED ( "light emitting diode ") billboards along Interstate 394 and
Interstate 494. The LED function was applied to two existing "static" image billboards located
adjacent to the interstate. Following installation of the LED function, the City turned off the
power to the signs though a stop work order based on current city ordinance prohibiting flashing
signs, which is broadly defined, as well as permitting requirements for the retrofitting of the
signs to the upgraded technology. The billboard owner sued the City, and the court response to
this legal action as of the writing of this study has been to allow limited use of the LED
billboards. A moratorium on further signage of this type was established by the City to facilitate
the study of issues related to driver distraction and safety and appropriate regulatory measures
for LED and other types of changeable signage.
This study was undertaken on behalf of the City of Minnetonka to examine these issues. While
the concerns were precipitated by LED billboards in particular, this report examines more
broadly "dynamic" display signage which is defined as any characteristics of a sign that appear
to have movement or that appear to change, caused by any method other than physically
removing and replacing the sign or its components, whether the apparent movement or change is
in the display, the sign structure itself, or any other component of the sign. This includes a
display that incorporates a technology or method allowing the sign face to change the image
without having to physically or mechanically replace the sign face or its components. This also
includes any rotating, revolving, moving, flashing, blinking, or animated display and any display
that incorporates rotating panels, LED lights manipulated through digital input, "digital ink" or
any other method or technology that allows the sign face to present a series of images or
displays. These capabilities may be provided by a variety of technologies which are discussed
later in this report.
As the study progressed, additional communities within the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area, as
well as the League of Minnesota Cities, expressed interest in these issues. However, it is not the
intention of this report to provide a comprehensive study of all issues raised by dynamic signage,
or other types of billboards, but rather to focus narrowly on the issues of concern to the City of
Minnetonka.
2.0 PURPOSE OF STUDY AND METHODOLOGY
Driving a motor vehicle is a complex task that requires the ability to divide one's attention.
Simultaneously maintaining a steady and legal speed, changing lanes, navigating traffic and
intersections, reading and interpreting street signs, drivers are often challenged by conditions that
can change in the blink of an eye. Internal and external physical conditions can affect how safely
the driving task is accomplished. Drug or alcohol intoxication, fatigue and/or distractions in the
driving environment all can play a role in motor vehicle crashes. However, these conditions are
rarely the sole reason for a crash. Rather, these conditions serve to exacerbate an already -
complex driving environment and subsequent mistakes in judgment can lead to crashes.
A4
Increasingly complex traffic and roadway environments require greater attention to and focus on
the driving task.
The purpose of this study is to understand what existing transportation research tells us about the
effects of dynamic signs on motorists. This study also explores regulatory measures enacted in
other jurisdictions to address concerns related to driver distraction. Due to time and scope
constraints, this report is not comprehensive, but rather addresses the most frequently cited and
easily accessible information available. The report concludes with a discussion of regulatory
options for the City of Minnetonka to consider in their formulation of policies to address
dynamic signage.
Information collected for this report draws from a variety of sources including interviews with
subject matter experts, government and academic research, and policies developed to regulate
various types of signage.
Several city and county sign ordinances were used as references for policy and regulatory
research. In some cases, ordinances were brought to our attention by planners and others
following the sign ordinance issue. In others, Internet searches were conducted using words and
references that apply specifically to dynamic signs.
Several sign manufacturers and sign companies provided an industry perspective through a
workshop with the SRF Consulting Group and the City of Minnetonka staff on February 27,
2007. This meeting yielded information about sign characteristics that can be addressed through
policy and regulatory measures. Daktronics, a company that manufactures and markets LED
signs, was also helpful in this regard, providing informational materials about characteristics of
signs that can be regulated and examples of city sign ordinances with which they are familiar.
3.0 SELECTED RESEARCH FINDINGS
This following section presents a summary of expert opinions and selected driver distraction
research conducted by government and academic researchers examining roadside signage and its
effects on the driving task. Studies are organized around critical questions with serious research
ramifications.
• Is there reason to believe that billboards are a source of distraction?
• Is there reason to believe that "dynamic" billboards are an additional source of
distraction?
• How much distraction is a problem?
• How does "brightness " affect driver safety concerns?
• How should billboards and other signage be regulated from a driver safety perspective?
245
3.1 Expert Opinions
A combination of researchers and public policy experts were interviewed for this study.
Individuals were identified while conducting background research into driver distraction and
were interviewed because of their credibility in the field.
Kathleen Harder, a researcher at the University of Minnesota, has conducted driver
distraction research for a variety of applications, including research for Mn/DOT. She is
an expert in the field of human factors and psychology. She indicated that electronic
billboards pose a driver distraction threat because of their ability to display high
resolution color images, their ability to change images, and their placement in
relationship to the roadway, particularly in areas where the road curves, exits and
entrances are present, merges, lane drops, weaving areas, key locations of official signs,
and/or areas where roadways divide.
Greg Davis, a researcher with the FHWA Office of Safety Research and Development,
in Washington, DC was involved in the 2001 FHWA study on electronic billboards. He
was interviewed to gain a deeper understanding of this critical study and to learn of
recent research in this area. Davis stated that while no research has established a direct
cause and effect relationship between electronic outdoor advertising signs and crash rates,
the lack of such a research finding does not preclude a causal relationship between
electronic billboards and crashes. He advocated for a new study that can control all
variables and determine if a cause and effect relationship exists.
Scott Robinson, an outdoor advertising regulator for Mn/DOT, wrote the 2003 technical
memorandum that addresses allowable changes for outdoor advertising devices. Mr.
Robinson indicated that the memo was originally written in 1998 to establish a permitted
rate of change for tri- vision signs and that the application to electronic billboards was not
considered. The minimum change rate of 4.9 seconds for 70 mph roadways and 6.2
seconds for 55 mph roadways was based on the travel time between static signs spaced at
the minimum allowed distance apart. Mr. Robinson also indicated that the memo is not a
Mn/DOT policy, statute or rule, but rather it was written to provide internal guidance.
Jerry Wachtel, an Engineering Psychologist and highway safety expert in private
practice, was the lead author for the FHWA's original (1980) study on electronic
billboards. He has continued his active involvement in this field, and advises Government
agencies as well as the outdoor advertising industry on sign ordinances, sign operations,
and the implications of the latest research on road safety. Mr. Wachtel believes that it is
neither feasible from the perspective of research design and methodology, nor necessary
from a regulatory perspective, to demonstrate a causal relationship between digital
billboards and road safety. Rather, he believes that we have a strong understanding, based
on many years of research, of driver information processing capabilities and limitations,
and of the contributions to, and consequences of, driver distraction, on crash risk; and
that this understanding is sufficient to support development of guidelines and ordinances
for the design, placement, and operation of digital billboards so as to lessen their
potentially adverse impact on road safety and traffic operations.
346
Wachtel also offered comments on drafts of this report. In later conversations related to
his review, Wachtel stated his belief that even though visual fixations on roadway signs
decrease as route familiarity increases, a strength of the new digital billboards is that they
can present messages that are always new. Thus, the conclusion from the 1980 FHWA
study is another argument against these billboards; namely, drivers spend more time
looking at the unfamiliar signs than at familiar ones, suggesting digital billboards are
more dangerous than traditional fixed billboards. Wachtel also suggested his preference
for a goal to have any given driver experience only one, or a maximum of two, messages
from an individual roadside sign.
3.2 Billboards: a Source of Driver Distraction ?'
The purpose of a sign is to attract the attention of passersby so that a message is conveyed. To
the degree signs attract the attention of vehicle drivers, they may distract them from the activity
of driving. While this report primarily examines the impact of dynamic roadside advertising, the
role traditional static advertising plays in driver distraction is discussed below.
The relationship between roadside advertising and crash rates has been the subject of several
studies. The majority of this research was conducted in the 1950s, 60s and 70s. While some of
the earliest studies have been subsequently criticized for flawed methodologies and improper
statistical techniques, some findings emerge when the totality of the studies are examined. One
of these findings is that the correlation between crash rates and roadside advertising is strongest
in complex driving environments. For example, higher crash rates were found at intersections
(generally considered a complex environment) that have advertising than those intersections that
do not have advertising. A few of the studies that are important in this field are summarized
below.
Minnesota Department of Transportation Field Study (1951) and
Michigan State Highway Department Field Study (1952) 2
These two studies from the early 1950s used similar methods but came to significantly
different conclusions. Recognized as the more scientifically rigorous study, the
Minnesota study found that increases in the number of advertising signs per mile are
correlated with increases in motor vehicle crash rates. It also found that intersections
with at least four advertising signs experienced three times more crashes than
intersections with no advertising signs. Conversely, the less rigorous Michigan study
found the presence of advertising signs had no effect on the number of crashes.
Iowa State College, Do Road Signs Affect Accidents? (Lauer & McMonagle, 1955)3
A laboratory test was created to determine the effect of advertising signs on driver
behavior. The results of this study found removing all advertising signs from the driver's
field of vision did not improve driver performance. When signs were included, driver
performance was slightly better. Note that laboratory methods used in this study are
considered to be dated by today's standards.
A7
Faustman (California Route 40) Field Study (1961 )4 and Federal Highway
Administration, Reanalysis of Faustman Field Study (1973)5
Two studies that appear to have stood the test of time are Faustman's original analysis of
California Route 40 and its re- examination by FHWA more than a decade later. The
original analysis tried to improve upon previous research by limiting variables, such as
roadway geometric design and roadway access controls. The FHWA reanalysis focused
on disaggregating the data and converting actual crashes to expected crash rates on
specific roadway sections. Each of the sections was given a value based on the number
of billboards on the section. A linear regression was performed to determine the
expected crash rates. An analysis of variance of the regression coefficients found that the
number of billboards on a section was statistically significant. The reanalysis found a
strong correlation between the number of billboards and crash rates as shown in Table 1.
Table 1. FHWA Reanalysis of Faustman's Findings.
Federal Highway Administration
Safety and Environmental Design Considerations in the Use of Commercial
Electronic Variable - Message Signage (Wachtel & Netherton, 1 980) s
This extensive review provides a comprehensive discussion of roadside advertising
research as of 1980. The study authors noted "attempts to quantify the impact of roadside
advertising on traffic safety have not yielded conclusive results." The authors found that
courts typically rule on the side of disallowing billboards because of the "readily
understood logic that a driver cannot be expected to give full attention to his driving tasks
when he is reading a billboard." Because the distraction evidence is not conclusive, these
decisions were generally not based on empirical evidence.
The research review noted that accident reports often cite "driver distraction" as a default
category used by uncertain law enforcement officers who must identify the cause of a
crash. As a result, the authors believe crashes due to driver distraction are not always
properly identified. In addition, law enforcement officers often fail to indicate the precise
crash locations on crash reports, making it difficult to establish relationships between
crashes and roadside features.
A$
Expected No. of
Cumulative Increase
No. of Billboards
Accidents in a
in Accident Rate
5 -year Period
0
5.92
1
6.65
12.3
2
7.38
24.2
3
8.11
37.0
4
8.84
49.3
5
9.57
61.7
Federal Highway Administration
Safety and Environmental Design Considerations in the Use of Commercial
Electronic Variable - Message Signage (Wachtel & Netherton, 1 980) s
This extensive review provides a comprehensive discussion of roadside advertising
research as of 1980. The study authors noted "attempts to quantify the impact of roadside
advertising on traffic safety have not yielded conclusive results." The authors found that
courts typically rule on the side of disallowing billboards because of the "readily
understood logic that a driver cannot be expected to give full attention to his driving tasks
when he is reading a billboard." Because the distraction evidence is not conclusive, these
decisions were generally not based on empirical evidence.
The research review noted that accident reports often cite "driver distraction" as a default
category used by uncertain law enforcement officers who must identify the cause of a
crash. As a result, the authors believe crashes due to driver distraction are not always
properly identified. In addition, law enforcement officers often fail to indicate the precise
crash locations on crash reports, making it difficult to establish relationships between
crashes and roadside features.
A$
Accident Research Unit, School of Psychology, University of Nottingham
Attraction and distraction of attention with roadside advertisements (Crundall et
al., 2005)'
This research used eye movement tracking to measure the difference between street -level
advertisements and raised advertisements in terms of how they held drivers' attention at
times when attention should have been devoted to driving tasks. The study found that
street -level advertising signs are more distracting than raised signs.
3.3 "Dynamic" Billboards: an Additional Source of Distraction?
Signage owners or leasers want to incorporate dynamic features into their signage for a number
of reasons: to enhance the sign's ability to attract attention, to facilitate display of larger amounts
of information within the same sign area, to conveniently change message content, and to
enhance profitability. As mentioned earlier, this report uses the term "dynamic" signs to refer to
non - static signs capable of displaying multiple messages. Several studies documented the ability
of a sign to accomplish the first of these goals.
University of Toronto
Observed Driver Glance Behavior at Roadside Advertising Signs (Beijer & Smiley,
2004) 8
Research done at the University of Toronto compared driver behavior subject to passive
(static) and active (dynamic) signs. The study found that about twice as many glances
were made toward the active signs than passive signs. A disproportionately larger
number of long glances (greater than 0.75 seconds) taken were toward the active signs.
The duration of 0.75 seconds is important because it is close to the minimum perception -
reaction time required for a driver to react to a slowing vehicle. For vehicles with close
following distances, or under unusually complex driving conditions, a perception delay of
this length could increase the chance of a crash. The following findings were reported in
this study:
• 88% of the subjects made long glances (greater than 0.75 seconds).
• 22% of all glances made at all signs were long glances (greater than 0.75 seconds).
e 20% of all the subjects made long glances of over two seconds.
• As compared to static and scrolling text signs, video and tri- vision signs attracted
more long glances.
• Video and scrolling text signs received the longest average maximum glance
duration.
• All three of the moving sign types (video, scrolling text and tri- vision) attracted more
than twice as many glances as static signs.
X49
University of Toronto
Impact of Video Advertising on Driver Fixation Patterns (Smiley et al., 2001) 9
Another study completed at the University of Toronto used similar eye fixation
information in urban locations to show that drivers made roughly the same number of
glances at traffic signals and street signs with and without full- motion video billboards
present. This may be interpreted to mean that while electronic billboards may be
distracting, they do not appear to distract drivers from noticing traffic signs. This study
also found that video signs entering the driver's line of sight directly in front of the
vehicle (e.g., when the sign is situated at a curve) are very distracting.
City of Seattle Report (Wachtel, 2001) 10
The City of Seattle commissioned a report in 2001 to examine the relationship between
electronic signs with moving/flashing images and driver distraction. The report found
that electronic signs with moving images contribute to driver distraction for longer
intervals than electronic signs with no movement. Following are major points made in
the report:
• New video display technologies produce images of higher quality than previously
available technologies. These signs have improved color, image quality and
brightness.
• New video display technologies use LEDs with higher viewing angles. Drivers can
read the sign from very close distances when they are at a large angle from the face of
the sign.
• Signs with a visual story or message that carries for two or more frames are
particularly distracting because drivers tend to focus on the message until it is
completed rather than the driving task at hand.
• Research has shown that drivers expend about 80 percent of their attention on driving
related tasks, leaving 20% of their attention for non - essential tasks.
• The Seattle consultant suggests a "10 second rule" as the maximum display time for a
video message.
The expanded content of a dynamic sign also contributes to extended distraction from the
driving task. The Seattle Report examined how this may be due in part to the Zeigarnik
effect which describes the psychological need to follow a task to its conclusion. People's
attention is limited by the ability to only focus on a small number of tasks at a time, and
by the tendency to choose to complete one task before beginning another. In a driving
environment, drivers' attention might be drawn to the sign rather than the task of driving
because they are waiting to see a change in the message. This loss of attention could lead
to unsafe driving behaviors, such as prolonged glances away from the roadway, slowing,
or even lane departure.
#10
While the Zeigarnik effect may be present in a wide variety of driving situations, possible
scenarios that could affect drivers include:
• A scrolling message requires the viewer to concentrate as the message is revealed.
Based on the size and resolution of the sign, and the length of the message, this could
range from less than one second to many seconds.
• A sequence of images or messages that tell a story, during which the driver's
attention may be captured for the entire duration that the sign is visible. Instead of
merely glancing at the sign and then returning concentration to the driving task, more
attention may be given to the message.
• Anticipation of a new image appearing, even if the expected new image is not related
to the first image. In this case, the driver may be distracted while waiting for the
change.
Federal Highway Administration
Safety and Environmental Design Considerations in the Use of Commercial
Electronic Variable - Message Signage (Wachtel & Netherton, 1980) "
This research provides information on the use of on- premise Commercial Electronic
Variable- Message Signs (CEVMS) that display public service information (i.e,. time and
temperature) and advertising messages along the Interstate highway system. The
research found the following major considerations:
• Highway Safety Considerations
The link between changing messages that attract drivers' attention and crashes has
been an issue of concern since the earliest forms of electronic signage became
available. This study thoroughly reviewed the literature seeking information
regarding a potential link between CEVMS and crashes:
"Although a trend in recent findings has begun to point to
a demonstrable relationship between CEVMS and
accidents, the available evidence remains statistically
insufficient to scientifically support this relationship. "
The study also noted that studies have not documented information about "such
occurrences as `near misses' or traffic impedances that are widely recognized as
relevant to safety, and which may or may not be attributable to the presence of
roadside advertising."
• Human Factors Considerations
Human factors relate to all the elements that explain driver behavior, such as eye
glances and driver responses to a variety of driving- related stimuli. The study makes
the point that simple driving- related tasks consume relatively little information
processing capacity. However, when other conditions, such as congestion,
complicated roadway geometries, or weather are also considered, the marginal extra
�%l I
amount of attention required to read roadside advertisements could lead to driving
errors that could cause crashes.
"The enormous flexibility of display possessed by CE VMS
makes it possible to use them in ways that can attract
drivers' attention at greater distances, hold their attention
longer, and deliver a wider variety of information and
image stimuli than is possible by the use of conventional
advertising signs. "
Texas Transportation Institute for FHWA, Impacts of Using Dynamic Features to
Display Messages on Changeable Message Signs (Dudek et al., 2005) 12
This study examined the comprehension times for three different scenarios for
DOT - operated changeable message signs. The scenarios evaluated were:
• Flashing an entire one -phase message
• Flashing one line of a one -phase message while two other lines of the message remain
constant
• Alternating text on one line of a three -line CMS while keeping the other two lines of
text constant on the second phase of the message
The findings of this study were:
• Flashing messages did not produce faster reading times.
• Flashing messages may have an adverse effect on message comprehension for
unfamiliar drivers.
• Average reading times for flashing line messages and two -phase messages were
significantly longer than for alternating messages.
• Message comprehension was negatively affected by flashing line messages.
While this research did not evaluate advertising- related signs, it does demonstrate that
flashing signs require more of the driver's time and attention to comprehend the message.
In the case of electronic billboards, this suggests that billboards that flash may require
more time and attention to read than static ones.
3.3.1 OTHER INFORMATION
NHTSA Driver Distraction Internet Forum (2000) 13
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration held an internet forum to gather
research and public comment related to driver distraction with an emphasis on the use of
cell phones, navigation systems, wireless Internet and other in- vehicle devices. During
this forum, participants were invited to take a poll to determine the most prominent driver
#12
distraction issues. Electronic billboards were identified as one of six noted sources of
distraction.
Parliament of Victoria, Australia, Report of the Road Safety Committee on the
Inquiry into Driver Distraction (2006) 74
This report identified road signs and advertising as one of the largest sources of driver
distraction. At least three billboards near Melbourne, Australia display moving images.
"The Committee considers these screens to be at the high
end of potential visual distraction and accordingly, present
a risk to drivers. "
The study also included a quote from the Manager of the Road User Behaviour group at
VicRoads (the State's road and traffic authority) from a December 2005 hearing:
What we do know is when there is movement involved, such
as flicker or movement in the visual periphery, that this is
more likely to capture a driver's attention. We actually are
hard -wired as human beings to movement, so particularly
moving screens and information that scrolls at
intersections and in highly complex driving situations —
these are risky, and in particular researchers have been
most concerned about those sort of advertising materials.
This opinion would suggest that electronic signs can present a distraction to drivers.
3.4 How Much Distraction Is a Problem?
A number of studies were identified that discussed concerns with driver distraction generally. It
should be noted that some of the studies cited use specific crash data that is ten or more years
old. Direct comparison of distraction sources to influences of today may not be completely valid
due to increased technological sophistication of distracting influences. These could include in-
vehicle technology (e.g., navigation systems, MP3 players, DVD players, CD players, computer
systems, etc.) as well as other potentially distracting influences (e.g., cell phones, text messaging,
dynamic signage, other roadway elements, etc.) that were not commonplace when the data for
these studies was collected:
Australian Road Research Board
Investigations of Distraction by Irrelevant Information (Johnston & Cole, 1976)15
This research used five experiments to test whether drivers could maintain efficient
performance in their driving tasks while being subjected to content that was information
rich, but irrelevant to driving. The findings were that a small, but statistically significant
amount of performance degradation was observed when the participant was under a
critical load of stimuli.
413
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration/ Virginia Tech Transportation
Institute
Impact of Driver Inattention on Near -Crash /Crash Risk: An Analysis Using the
100 -Car Naturalistic Driving Study Data (Klauer et al., 2006) 16
This study analyzed the data from a driving database developed by the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration. This database contained exhaustive data recorded by
instrumented vehicles that measured glance position, impairment, drowsiness, risk taking
and many other parameters potentially involved in crash causation. Vehicles were
instrumented so that an observer did not need to be in the vehicle to collect data.
Automated data collection reduced the problem of an observer influencing driver
behavior. The study found that glances of two seconds or greater doubled the risk of
crashes or near- crashes. The study also found that 22 percent of crashes are accompanied
by "secondary- task" distraction whether inside or outside the vehicle.
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration/ Virginia Tech Transportation
Institute
Driver Inattention is a Major Factor in Serious Traffic Crashes (2001) "
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration commissioned a study to examine
the causes of crashes. The study gathered information from four areas throughout the
country and used data from the National Automotive Sampling System (MASS) from
April 1996 -April 1997 for analysis. The geographic areas were selected because they had
good crash investigation practices and high interview completion rates. The results of
this study are summarized in Table 2.
Table 2. Crash Causation Summary
Causal Category Percentage of Drivers
Contributing to Causation
Driver Inattention 22.7
Vehicle Speed 18.7
Alcohol Impairment
18.2
Perceptual Errors
15.1
Decision Errors
10.1
Incapacitation
6.4
Other
8.8
Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine
The Role of Driver Inattention in Crashes; New Statistics from the
1995 Crashworthiness Data System (Wang, 1996)'6
This report analyzed the NHTSA 1995 Crash Worthiness Data System (CDS). It found
that the greatest source of driver distraction (3.2 percent) was due to a specified person,
object or event outside the vehicle. The full results of the study are presented in Table 3.
414
Table 3. Percentage of CDS Crashes Involving Inattention- Distraction
Related Crash Causes
Date Molest
% of
Drivers
S of
I Crashes
Attentive or not distracted
46.6%
287%
Looped but did rot we
5.6%
9.7%
Distracted by other ow [specified)
0.9%
1.6%
Distracted by moving objecA in vehicle [ ]
0.3%
0.5%
Distracted while dialing, talking, or lisoenin8 to cellular
phom pocation and typ of phone
0.1%0
0.1%6
Distracted while adjustft elitnate controls
0.2%0
0.3%0
Distracted while adjuxting radio, easusas, CD ified]
1.2%
2.1%
Distracted while using other devioe/object in vehicle
0.1%
0.25
Sleepy or fell adey
1.5%
2.6%
Distracted by outside person, object, or event [specifiedli
2.0%
3.2%
Eating or drinking
0.1%
0.2%
Smokinkrelated
0.1%
0.2%
.DistracteNinalsonlive, details unknown
1.5%
2.6%
t)Iher dWractios [
1.3%
2.2%
Utdmown/No Driver
1 38.5%1
46.0%
Weightod driver N - 4, 627,000 (7,943, unweill*W); wei3hted crab N - 2,61900 (4,536);
In order for a troth to classified "ansative." all involved driven had to be clssaMw 'aWnlive. "
0 - artbmte based on 5-9 case.
University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center
The Role of Driver Distraction in Traffic Crashes (Stutts et al., 2001)"
A study prepared by the University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center
for the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety examined the sources of driver distraction in
traffic crashes. The data came from the CDS from 1995 -1999. Of the thirteen specific
sources of distraction tracked by the study, the greatest source of distraction was an
outside person, object or event. While the study does not break down the sources of
outside distraction, it does show that distractions outside the vehicle are the largest factor
in distraction- related crashes. The results of this study are presented in Table 4.
Table 4. Specific Sources of Distraction Among Drivers in Distraction- Related Crashes
Specific Distraction Percentage of
Drivers
Outside person, object or event
29.4
Adjusting radio, cassette, CD
11.4
Other occupant in vehicle
10.9
Moving object in vehicle
4.3
Other device /object brought into vehicle
2.9
Adjusting vehicle /climate controls
2.8
Eating or drinking
1.7
Using/dialing cell phone
1.5
Smoking related
0.9
Other distraction
25.6
Unknown distraction
8.6
Total
100.0
415
Three studies were found which attempted to measure driver behavior specifically in response to
dynamic signage. Two of these studies demonstrated a potential relationship between dynamic
signage and crash rates:
Minnesota Department of Transportation, The Effectiveness and Safety of Traffic
and Non - Traffic Related Messages Presented on Changeable Message Signs
(CMS) (Harder, 2004) 20
This study used a driving simulator to measure the effect of Department of
Transportation changeable message signs on traffic flow. The two messages evaluated
were a "crash ahead" warning and an AMBER Alert (child abduction information). The
research found that just over half of the participants used the "crash ahead" message and
60 percent could recall the AMBER Alert with scores of Good or Better. Over one fifth
of the participants slowed down by at least 2 mph upon seeing the AMBER Alert,
demonstrating that messages relevant to drivers are associated with changes in at least
some drivers' travel speed .
Decision of the Outdoor Advertising Board in the Matter of John Donnelly & Sons,
Permitee, Telespot of New England, Inc., Intervenor, and Department of Public
Works, Intervenor, with Respect to Permit Numbered 19260 as Amended (1976) Z'
This proceeding documents the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Outdoor Advertising
Board's ruling regarding one of the first changeable signs. This sign was located near an
arterial road in Boston and used magnetic discs to portray a message that changed every
30 seconds. The original sign permit was rejected based on four criteria, one of which
was safety. Upon appeal, the Massachusetts Department of Public Works allowed the
permit based on the fact that the sign would give the public a benefit. However, they
ultimately determined that the sign was a safety hazard based on crash rates before and
after the sign was installed. Tables 5 and 6 show the change in crash rates.
Table 5. Telespot Sign Crash Rates - Expressway Southbound
416
Average
Average
Average
per year
per year
Percent
(1/1/1970-
(1/1/1973-
Change
12/31/1972 )
3/31/1975
Crashes where
the sign was viewable
29.0
20.0
-31.0
north of sign)
Crashes where
the sign was not viewable
39.0
15.6
-60.0
south of sign)
416
Table 6 Telespot Sign Crash Rates - Expressway Northbound
This analysis shows that while crash rates decreased on comparable sections in the years
after the sign was installed, the sections where the sign was visible experienced smaller
crash rate decreases. Due to these arguments, the Board ruled that the operation of the
sign must be terminated.
Wisconsin Department of Transportation
Milwaukee County Stadium Variable Message Sign Study — Impacts of an
Advertising Variable Message Sign on Freeway Traffic (1994) 22
A study prepared by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) examined
crash rates before and after an advertising variable message sign was installed in 1984 on
the Milwaukee County Stadium, home of the Milwaukee Brewers professional baseball
team. Crash statistics were analyzed for the three years before and the one and three
years after the sign was installed. As they are often associated with driver distraction,
side -swipe and rear -end crashes, as well as total crashes, were examined for both the
eastbound and westbound directions. The sign was much more visible to eastbound
traffic due to the stadium's proximity to the roadway and the amount of visual
obstructions for westbound traffic.
The analysis found an increase in crash rates for all crash types in the eastbound direction
after the sign was installed. Most pronounced was an 80 percent increase in side -swipe
crashes after the first year of installation. Results in the westbound direction were mixed,
with a 29 percent decrease in crashes the first year the sign was in place and a 35 percent
increase in the three years the sign was in place. Although no control roadway sections
were studied, an interview with the study author revealed that the introduction of a sign
on a high volume curving roadway may have introduced enough distraction to an already
demanding driving environment to explain the higher crash rate in the eastbound
direction. The study author also stated that the study was not able to establish a causal
relationship between the sign and the crash rates."
Federal Highway Administration
Research Review of Potential Safety Effects of Electronic Billboards on Driver
Attention and Distraction (2001) 24
The Federal Highway Administration published a comprehensive report in 2001 that
consisted of a literature search, literature review and a description of research needs for
417
Average per year
Average per year
Average
(1/1/1970-
(1/1/1973-
Percent
12/31/1972 )
3/31/1975 )
Change
Crashes where
the sign was viewable
46.3
42.7
-7.8
south of sign)
Crashes where
the sign was not viewable
8.0
1.8
-77.5
north of sign)
This analysis shows that while crash rates decreased on comparable sections in the years
after the sign was installed, the sections where the sign was visible experienced smaller
crash rate decreases. Due to these arguments, the Board ruled that the operation of the
sign must be terminated.
Wisconsin Department of Transportation
Milwaukee County Stadium Variable Message Sign Study — Impacts of an
Advertising Variable Message Sign on Freeway Traffic (1994) 22
A study prepared by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) examined
crash rates before and after an advertising variable message sign was installed in 1984 on
the Milwaukee County Stadium, home of the Milwaukee Brewers professional baseball
team. Crash statistics were analyzed for the three years before and the one and three
years after the sign was installed. As they are often associated with driver distraction,
side -swipe and rear -end crashes, as well as total crashes, were examined for both the
eastbound and westbound directions. The sign was much more visible to eastbound
traffic due to the stadium's proximity to the roadway and the amount of visual
obstructions for westbound traffic.
The analysis found an increase in crash rates for all crash types in the eastbound direction
after the sign was installed. Most pronounced was an 80 percent increase in side -swipe
crashes after the first year of installation. Results in the westbound direction were mixed,
with a 29 percent decrease in crashes the first year the sign was in place and a 35 percent
increase in the three years the sign was in place. Although no control roadway sections
were studied, an interview with the study author revealed that the introduction of a sign
on a high volume curving roadway may have introduced enough distraction to an already
demanding driving environment to explain the higher crash rate in the eastbound
direction. The study author also stated that the study was not able to establish a causal
relationship between the sign and the crash rates."
Federal Highway Administration
Research Review of Potential Safety Effects of Electronic Billboards on Driver
Attention and Distraction (2001) 24
The Federal Highway Administration published a comprehensive report in 2001 that
consisted of a literature search, literature review and a description of research needs for
417
the topic of electronic billboards (EBBs). While the study did not conduct any new
research, it does provide an excellent summary of the role electronic billboards play in
traffic safety and includes good descriptions of the terminology related to electronic
billboards. Selected findings from that synthesis are provided below:
"In most instances, researchers were not able to verb that an
EBB was a major factor in causing a crash. Only one study
since the 1980 review and one lawsuit were identified. "
"Studies were identified that verified that. an increase in
distraction, a decrease in conspicuity, or a decrease in
legibility may cause an increase in the crash rate. "
"Commercial EBBs are designed to `catch the eye' of drivers.
Their presence may distract drivers from concentrating on the
driving task and visual surrounds. "
"There is indication that individual differences in age and
driving experience may be important considerations in driver
distraction, and are relevant to understanding driver responses
to the external environment. Furthermore, research regarding
driver familiarity of their route demonstrated that visual
fixations on roadway signs decreases as route familiarity
increases. This research may show that there is a difference
between commuter and visiting drivers. "
Based on these findings, the FHWA recommended additional research to further
demonstrate how roadway characteristics, sign characteristics and legibility, driver
characteristics and other potential driver distractions affect traffic safety. FHWA was
contacted to see if any new information was available. Greg Davis, a Research
Psychologist with the FHWA Office of Safety R &D, indicated that the FHWA has not
performed additional studies on the topic since the report was published. He stated that
there is "no direct correlation between electronic outdoor advertising signs and crash
rates ". He referred to a before /after study of electronic signs installed along a freeway in
Las Vegas that found no change in crash rates. He went on to say that the lack of a
research finding that links signs with crash rates does not mean that a causal relationship
does not exist. He indicated that he has been contacted by several law enforcement
agencies regarding the link between driver distraction and dynamic message
signs /electronic billboards. He indicated that this is a timely and pertinent topic for many
states due to the increasing popularity and capabilities of electronic outdoor advertising
devices, and he expects further research to be forthcoming. He advocates for a new study
that can control for all variables and determine if a cause and effect relationship exists. 25
3.5 How Does "Brightness" Affect Driver Safety Concerns?
The brightness of any sign, static or dynamic, raises concerns with discomfort or disability glare
to the driver that may arise when viewing any lighted object. Disability Glare occurs when a
418
driver is exposed to a light source so bright that it temporarily blinds the driver, impairing their
ability to perform driving tasks. This temporary blindness is brief, but can be dangerous.
Discomfort Glare occurs when a light source is bright enough to distract or encourage the driver
to look away from the light, but is not blinding. Discomfort glare is of particular concern in
cases where a bright sign is located in the same line of sight as a traffic sign, signal or another
vehicle.
While concerns about glare are not unique to dynamic signs, newer sign technologies, which
often include dynamic components, have the technical capability to emit more light and/or
respond to ambient light conditions, raising additional concerns about sign brightness in areas
where signs compete with regulatory traffic signs or signals.
3.6 Billboards and Other Signage Regulation: a Minnesota Perspective
Roadside signage is governed by policies and laws at the federal, state and local levels.
Minnesota Statute, Chapter 173 seeks to "reasonably and effectively regulate and control the
erection or maintenance of advertising devices on land adjacent to such highways." The statute
requires adherence to federal statutes with respect to interstate and primary systems of highways.
Minnesota Statute Ch. 173.16 Subd. 3. regulates lighting of signs. Signs which are "illuminated
by any flashing light or lights, except those giving public service information" (time, date,
temperature, weather or news) are prohibited. This section also states:
(b) Advertising devices shall not be erected or maintained which are not effectively
shielded so as to prevent beams or rays of light from being directed at any portion of the
traveled way of an interstate or primary highway, of such intensity or brilliance as to
cause glare or impair the vision of the operator of any motor vehicle; or which otherwise
interfere with any driver's operation of a motor vehicle are prohibited.
and
(c) Outdoor advertising devices shall not be erected or maintained which shall be so
illuminated that they interfere with the effectiveness of or obscure any official traffic
sign, device or signal.
3.7 Billboard and Other Signage Regulation: Other Perspectives
During the course of this study, several articles were found which summarize regulation of
dynamic signage in other states:
Wisconsin Department of Transportation
Electronic Billboards and Highway Safety (2003) 26
The Wisconsin Department of Transportation also published a literature review report to
further explain the current state of EBB research. Although much of the information is
#19
mentioned in other sections of this report, the Wisconsin review did summarize
Wisconsin's regulations for electronic billboards.
• No message may be displayed for less than one -half second;
• No message may be repeated at intervals of less than two seconds;
• No segmented message may last longer than 10 seconds;
• No traveling message may travel at a rate slower than 16 light columns per second or
faster than 32 columns per second (light column defined as pixel column);
• No variable message sign lamp may be illuminated to a degree of brightness that is
greater than necessary for adequate visibility.
National Alliance of Highway Beautification Agencies (1999) 2'
Although this survey is eight years old, it generated the following information related to
electronic billboards:
• Nine states had specific regulations governing signs,
• Nine states had regulations on tri- vision signs that were either being drafted or in
pending legislation,
• Fifteen states had regulations regarding moving parts and/or lights,
• Nine state had no regulations on tri- vision signs, and
• Six states and Washington, DC, prohibited tri- vision signs.
An investigation into state outdoor advertising regulations was also conducted.
• Thirty-six states had prohibitions on signs with red, flashing, intermittent, or moving
lights,
• Twenty -nine states prohibited signs that were so illuminated as to obscure or interfere
with traffic control devices, and
• Twenty -nine states prohibited signs located on interstate or primary highway outside
of the zoning authority of incorporated cities within 500 ft of an interchange or
intersection at grade or safety roadside area.
Parliament of Victoria, Australia, Report of the Road Safety Committee on the
Inquiry into Driver Distraction (2006) 28
This report, cited earlier for its driver distraction opinions, identifies road signs and
advertising as one of the largest sources of driver distraction. VicRoads, the state's road
and traffic authority, has implemented the following regulations.
420
Figure]. VicRoads' Ten Point Road Safety Checklist
An advertisement, or any structure, device or hoarding for the exhibition of
an advertisement, is considered to be a road safety hazard if it:
1.
obstructs a driver's line of sight at an intersection, curve or
point of egress from an adjacent property; or
2.
obstructs a driver's view of a traffic control device, or is
likely to create a confusing or dominating background which
might reduce the clarity or effectiveness of a traffic control
device; or
3.
could dazzle or distract drivers due to its size, design or
colouring, or it being illuminated, reflective, animated or
flashing; or
4.
is at a location where particular concentration is required
(eg. high pedestrian volume intersection); or
5.
is likely to be mistaken for a traffic control device, for
example, because it contains red, green or yellow lighting, or
has red circles, octagons, crosses or triangles, or arrows; or
6.
requires close study from a moving or stationary vehicle in a
location where the vehicle would be unprotected from
passing traffic; or
7.
invites drivers to turn where there is fast moving traffic or
the sign is so close to the turning point that there is no time
to signal and turn safely; or
8.
is within 100 metres of a rural railway crossing; or
9.
has insufficient clearance from vehicles on the carriageway;
or
10. could mislead drivers or be mistaken as an instruction to
drivers.
#21
VicRoads also gives operational requirements for electronic advertising message signs.
Signage must:
• not display animated or moving images, or flashing or intermittent lights;
• remain unchanged for a minimum of 30 seconds;
• not be visible from a freeway; and
• satisfy the ten -point checklist.
4.0 SUGGESTED REGULATORY APPROACH
Local governments regulate electronic outdoor advertising devices in widely varying degrees.
Some cities completely prohibit the use of all electronic signs (sometimes specifying LED signs),
while others have no regulations specific to electronic signs. Between those two extremes, there
are many levels and types of control that can be applied.
The primary concerns to keep in mind when considering sign regulations are 1) First
Amendment rights, which can be affected by regulations that affect the content of a sign's
message, and therefore should be avoided, and 2) changing technology, which can quickly make
a sign ordinance no longer applicable if the ordinance has been specifically written to address a
certain type of sign technology. Performance based measures may therefore be preferable as they
remain viable even as sign technology advances.
4.1 Definitions
Signage discussions often include a number of different words or phrases used to describe the
technical characteristics of signage devices or their components (such as LEDs). For the purpose
of zoning, some additional terms are also used to describe sign characteristics. Any regulatory
efforts should take care to precisely define terminology. One possible resource in this effort is
"Street Graphics and the Law," published by the American Planning Association (APA)
Planning Advisory Service29.
4.2 Types of Regulatory Measures
4.2.1 Complete or Partial Prohibition of Electronic Signs
Some cities have completely prohibited the use of electronic outdoor advertising devices. For
example, the City of Maple Valley, WA prohibits all types of electronic outdoor advertising
devices including animated signs, electronic changeable message signs, flashing signs or
displays, moving signs, scrolling displays, and traveling displays. This applies to both on-
premise and off - premise signs.
Other cities are very selective about where electronic signs are allowed, allowing them only in
certain zoning districts. There are very few "standard" approaches. For the most part, each local
422
government tailors their regulations to their own situation. One approach adopted by cities is to
prohibit electronic outdoor advertising devices in residential zoning districts, and for a certain
distance away from residential zoning districts, similar to the zoning limitations placed on
illuminated signs. Some ordinances require that electronic signs be situated such that the sign
face is not visible from nearby residences.
4.2.2 Size Limitations on Electronic Signs
Another way of regulating electronic signs is to limit their size. Again, there is no set standard
for this. One ordinance reviewed for the purpose of this study limits the electronic portion of a
sign to no more than 50 percent of the sign face with the overall size determined by whatever the
sign ordinance allows for a particular zoning district. Other examples of electronic sign size
limitations include five square feet, 1,000 square inches, 20 square feet, and so forth. In other
ordinances, there is no differentiation made between the size of electronic signs and other signs.
According to input from representatives of the sign industry, the smaller the size of the electronic
sign, the more desirable it is for businesses to use frequent message changes, or sequenced
messages, where more than one screen of text is used to convey an entire message.
4.2.3 Rate -of -Change Limitations on Electronic Signs
Many communities that allow electronic signs also regulate the rate at which the messages on the
signs can be changed. Research on sign codes has shown this to range from as little as four
seconds to as long as 24 hours.
The Interstate 394 sign between Ridgedale Drive and Plymouth Road is visible for
approximately 45 seconds at free flow traffic speeds. Depending on text size, the message may
not be readable by drivers during this entire duration, but the message changes can attract
attention from long distances. Depending on how often the message changes occur and the
speed of traffic, drivers on this segment could see a varying number of discrete messages. Table
7 provides the number of message changes a driver would see at different change durations and
traffic speeds.
#23
Table 7. Number of New Messages Seen at Various Driver Speeds and
Time Intervals Between Messa es
*Assuming the sign is clearly visible from one -half mile away.
Prohibiting displays from changing quickly can minimize potential driver distraction, but it
would significantly limit the message owner's ability to convey information that does not fit on
one screen of the sign. Using two or more successive screens to convey a message is referred to
as sequencing. Based on the studies summarized in part 3 of this Report, including the glance
duration studies performed by Klaur for the FHWA in 2006 and by Beijer & Smiley in 2004, and
Wachtel's analysis for Seattle of the Zeigarnik effect, a message delivery system such as
sequencing that requires or induces a driver to watch the sign for several seconds increases the
likelihood of driver distraction. Based on information from the sign industry, for sequencing to
be effective in a marketing sense, a brief rate -of -change (1 -2 seconds) is generally used before
transitioning into the next screen.
Some codes specify how an image changes, while other codes prohibit the use of transitions.
The change from one image to another can be accomplished by various techniques: no transition
— simply a change from one screen to another, or fading or dissolving one image into the next.
Flashing, spinning, revolving, or other more distracting transition methods can be prohibited,
allowing businesses to use sequencing in an effective manner without making the signs overly
distracting. Another way of regulating distracting transitions is to require a very short time of a
dark or empty screen between images.
4.2.4 Motion, Animation, or Video Limitations on Electronic Signs
Motion on a sign can consist of everything from special text effects (spinning, revolving,
shaking, flashing, etc.) to simple graphics, such as balloons or bubbles rising across the screen, to
more realistic moving images that have the appearance of a television screen. According to sign
industry representatives, video imagery on a sign is referred to as "animation" if the sign is
limited to the capability of 10 frames per second. Fewer frames per second make the moving
image look more like animation. Imagery produced by signs that have the capability of
processing up to 30 frames per second is accurately referred to as "video" imaging.
Many communities that allow dynamic signs do not allow the application of any type of motion,
animation, or video on the signs. However, Seattle was obliged to allow video imagery on their
signs after earlier signage code regulating certain types of signs was not strictly enforced. In
addition to requiring a dark period between successive messages to overcome the Zeigarnik
effect, Seattle also limits the duration of the video message to a minimum of two seconds and a
AL24
Number of Messages Seen
Time sign is
Message Display Time (seconds)
Speed
(mph) P
clearly visible*
1800 3600
6 8 10 60
(seconds)
seconds
(30 minutes) (1 hour)
30
60
11 9 7 2 1 1
45
40
8 6 5 2 1 1
55
33
7 5 4 2 1 1
*Assuming the sign is clearly visible from one -half mile away.
Prohibiting displays from changing quickly can minimize potential driver distraction, but it
would significantly limit the message owner's ability to convey information that does not fit on
one screen of the sign. Using two or more successive screens to convey a message is referred to
as sequencing. Based on the studies summarized in part 3 of this Report, including the glance
duration studies performed by Klaur for the FHWA in 2006 and by Beijer & Smiley in 2004, and
Wachtel's analysis for Seattle of the Zeigarnik effect, a message delivery system such as
sequencing that requires or induces a driver to watch the sign for several seconds increases the
likelihood of driver distraction. Based on information from the sign industry, for sequencing to
be effective in a marketing sense, a brief rate -of -change (1 -2 seconds) is generally used before
transitioning into the next screen.
Some codes specify how an image changes, while other codes prohibit the use of transitions.
The change from one image to another can be accomplished by various techniques: no transition
— simply a change from one screen to another, or fading or dissolving one image into the next.
Flashing, spinning, revolving, or other more distracting transition methods can be prohibited,
allowing businesses to use sequencing in an effective manner without making the signs overly
distracting. Another way of regulating distracting transitions is to require a very short time of a
dark or empty screen between images.
4.2.4 Motion, Animation, or Video Limitations on Electronic Signs
Motion on a sign can consist of everything from special text effects (spinning, revolving,
shaking, flashing, etc.) to simple graphics, such as balloons or bubbles rising across the screen, to
more realistic moving images that have the appearance of a television screen. According to sign
industry representatives, video imagery on a sign is referred to as "animation" if the sign is
limited to the capability of 10 frames per second. Fewer frames per second make the moving
image look more like animation. Imagery produced by signs that have the capability of
processing up to 30 frames per second is accurately referred to as "video" imaging.
Many communities that allow dynamic signs do not allow the application of any type of motion,
animation, or video on the signs. However, Seattle was obliged to allow video imagery on their
signs after earlier signage code regulating certain types of signs was not strictly enforced. In
addition to requiring a dark period between successive messages to overcome the Zeigarnik
effect, Seattle also limits the duration of the video message to a minimum of two seconds and a
AL24
maximum of 10 seconds. This time frame was established based upon careful calculations of the
streets from which these signs could be seen, speed limits and traffic volumes in addition to the
community's concern over the extent to which moving images could distract drivers. However,
Seattle also limits the size of their electronic signs to a maximum of 1,000 square inches, with no
single dimension greater than three feet, thus minimizing the effect of video images.
4.2.5 Sign Placement and Snacin
Regulating the number of dynamic sign potentially visible to a driver at any one time as well as
the position of the sign in relationship to the roadway may reduce distraction to drivers. Spacing
requirements should consider the speed, width and horizontal and vertical alignment of the
roadway.
Some communities have established minimum distances between electronic signs. Establishing
an adequate distance between these types of devices seems particularly important if a fairly fast
rate of change is allowed for the purpose of facilitating sequenced messages or if animation and
video imaging is allowed. Closely spaced signs attempting to convey sequenced messages may
simply create visual overload and an over - stimulated driving environment. Research conducted
to date has not yielded information about optimal electronic sign spacing. Seattle adopted a 35-
foot spacing requirement for their electronic signs based upon multiple levels of analysis of the
downtown city environment in which these signs are present.
Due to the varying characteristics of individual roadways in this regard, overlay districts
allowing dynamic signage with conditions specific to that area could be considered. Overlay
districts could also take into account other locational factors such as offset from the roadway and
conspicuity. Determining appropriate offsets from the roadway must consider roadway clear
zone requirements as well as spacing of frontage roads and access points, while also considering
the signage too far outside the driver's line of sight may be a further distraction. Conspicuity, a
sign's ability to stand out from its surroundings, should also be considered.
4.2.6 Text Size
Legibility is another important property of signage. The preferred approach used within highway
signing is that drivers can read text that is 1 inch high from 30 feet away. Larger text is needed
for signs to be legible at greater distances. Large, legible text allows the driver to read the
billboard from varying distances and focus on the driving task. Conversely, with small text, the
driver is more likely to focus on the sign for a longer period of time and possibly be more
adversely distracted. However, the size or type of text or the amount of text due is rarely
regulated.
425
4.2.7 Briahtness Limitations on Electronic Siizns
One of the main concerns about the use of electronic signs, regardless of whether they consist of
changeable text, animation, or video, is the brightness of the image. The brightness of an object
can be characterized in two ways. (luminance is the total brightness of all the light at a point of
measurement. Illuminance often describes ambient light and can be measured with a standard
light meter such as is used in photography. Luminance is the measure of the light emanating
from an object with respect to its size and is the term is used to quantify electronic sign
brightness. The unit of measurement for luminance is nits, which is the total amount of light
emitted from a sign divided by the surface area of the sign (candelas per square meter).
Many, but not all, LED -type signage can be time - programmed to respond to day and nighttime
light levels. Higher -end signage types are equipped with photo cells to respond to ambient light
conditions. Despite these controls, LED signs have been observed that are considered to be
excessively bright. Sign industry representatives indicate that excessive brightness can be the
result of 1) sign malfunction or improper wiring, 2) lack of photo cell and/or dimming
mechanism, or 3) operator error or lack of understanding that brightness is not necessarily an
advantage, especially if it makes a sign unreadable or unpleasant to look at. They also maintain
that the intent of the electronic sign industry is to establish a brightness level that is similar to a
traditional internally or externally lit sign. Recent observations of sign technicians calibrating
the Interstate 394 LED billboard noted that the brightness controls are not calibrated to specific
nit levels, but rather vary in proportion to a set maximum level, like a volume control dial on a
typical car radio.
To control the extent to which electronic signs are a distraction or the extent to which they are
readable, many local governments have adopted regulations that limit nit levels. At this time,
ordinances that use nit level limitations typically differentiate between day time and night time
nit levels. A common daytime nit limitation ranges from 5,000 to 7,000 nits. A common
nighttime limitation is 500 nits, although in areas that are extremely dark at night, with very little
in the way of ambient light levels, less than 500 nits may be appropriate. Other communities
have taken this farther, such as Lincoln, Nebraska, whose sign code incorporates a graph of
varying ambient light levels ranging from night time to a bright sunny day and all conditions
between those two extremes, and has correlating nit limitations for the various ambient light
levels.
Enforcement of these types of regulations is challenging as luminance of electronic signs is very
difficult to measure in the field. Typically, sign luminance is measured and calibrated in a
controlled factory setting using a spectral photometer to measure the light output. This
calibration setting is then used in conjunction with a photo cell to control the brightness of the
sign. The higher the ambient light levels, the brighter the sign. There are different nit thresholds
for various colors. White is most often used to set dimming levels because at a constant nit level,
white has the most intensity as perceived by the human eye.
Lincoln uses a light meter to conduct testing on electronic signs and found a wide range of
luminance levels. One small electronic sign had luminance levels of 13,000 nits. The process
that Lincoln uses to check luminance levels is to hold a luminance meter close to the face of the
sign so that it captures only the light emitted from the sign. They have not had any requests to
426
measure the brightness of LED billboards, so the viability of using this approach on billboards
has not been explored.
In Seattle, sign luminance was found too difficult to measure, so signs are visually inspected
when complaints from the public are received. Sign owners are then contacted and asked to
adjust sign luminance accordingly.
Both Mesa, Arizona and Lincoln, Nebraska have included a requirement for written certification
from the sign manufacturer that the light intensity has been preset not to exceed the illumination
levels established by their code, and the preset intensity level is protected from end user
manipulation by password protected software or other method approved by the appropriate city
official. This language appears to offer the advantage of ensuring that electronic signs, at a
minimum, cannot exceed a certain established level of brightness.
At a minimum, it is important for communities to require all electronic signs to be equipped with
a dimmer control. A requirement for both a dimmer control and a photo cell, which constantly
keeps track of ambient light conditions and adjusts sign brightness accordingly, is optimal.
Over time, the LEDs used in electronic signs have a tendency to lose some of their intensity, and
an owner may choose to have the sign adjusted and calibrated, which involves adjusting the level
of electrical current in a manner that affects the brightness of the sign. This occurs over the
course of two or three years. Having maximum nit levels established would ensure that the sign
company has upper limits to work with as far as adjusting the sign is concerned.
4.3 Public Review
Most communities establish rules within their sign code and do not create opportunities for
electronic signs to be approved through conditional use permits or special use permits. Some
communities with special overlay districts, or areas that are oriented toward entertainment and
night life, have established a review process for electronic signs, or for various functions of
electronic signs such as animation and video.
Other communities take the opposite approach, where they allow electronic signs with no
controls whatsoever, except in certain special areas, such as a historic overlay district, or a
historic downtown district, where the signs are prohibited. Each community needs to tailor their
application of electronic signs to meet their needs.
As of the writing of this report, no ordinances have been discovered that have a special review
committee just for the purpose of electronic signs. Typically, sign regulations established in the
zoning ordinance would be reviewed in accordance with existing review and approval processes.
As with other development features, dynamic signage should be either prohibited, permitted, or
conditional depending upon the zoning district and/or the specific features of the sign as
established within the city's regulations (i.e. size, specific location with respect to the adjacent
roadway, zoning district, proximity of sensitive uses). The recommended review process for
permitted dynamic signs should be the same as procedures already in place for administrative
427
review. For dynamic signs requiring a Conditional Use Permit (CUP), the standard process for
public notification and a public hearing before the planning commission should apply.
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Driver distraction plays a significant role in traffic safety. Driver distraction is a factor in one in
four crashes, and of those crashes involving driver distraction, one in four involves distractions
outside the vehicle. The extent to which dynamic signage contributes to traffic safety has been
examined in this study. Following are some of the major findings from a review of available
research.
• Drivers that are subjected to information -rich content that is irrelevant to the driving task
(such as digital advertising) may be temporarily distracted enough to cause a degradation in
their driving performance. This degradation could lead to a crash.
The unlimited variety of changing content allows dynamic signage to attract drivers'
attention at greater distances and hold their attention longer than traditional static billboards.
Several studies have found a correlation between crashes and the complexity of the driving
environment. For example, crash rates are higher at intersections because the difficulty of
the driving task is increased by the roadway's complexity. Complex driving environments
place a high demand on drivers' attention. Introducing a source of distraction in an already
demanding driving environment is more likely to result in crashes. This is illustrated by the
1994 Wisconsin DOT study that examined crash rates before and after installation of an
electronic sign on a high- volume curving roadway. Introduction of this sign was identified
as a likely factor of the 80 percent increase in side -swipe crashes that was experienced.
Many studies have noted a correlation between outdoor advertising signs and crash rates, but
have not established a causal relationship between the signs and crash rates. Driving is a
complex task influenced by multiple factors. It is not necessary to establish a direct causal
relationship between outdoor advertising signs and crash rates to show that they can make the
driving task less safe. While the research shows that driver distraction is a key factor in
many motor vehicle crashes, this often includes many interacting factors that distract drivers.
The specific driver distraction danger that advertising signs contribute is difficult to quantify.
A study that could control for multiple variables (human factors, vehicle, enforcement and
the roadway environment) would be needed to provide a definitive statement on the level of
driver distraction that signs produce. Such a study would likely fmd that not all advertising
signs cause distraction that would lead to crashes, but some signs in some situations are more
likely to contribute to crashes than others.
Overall, the literature review conducted for the purpose of this study identifies a relationshiy
between driver distraction and electronic outdoor advertising devices. As indicated, driver
distraction is a significant factor in crashes. The purpose of dynamic signage is to attract the
attention of people in vehicles, so a natural conclusion from that knowledge is that drivers may
be distracted by them. Professional traffic engineering judgment concludes that driver
distraction generally contributes to a reduction in safe driving characteristics.
428
For this reason, state departments of transportation have carefully studied the design and location
of dynamic signs within the highway right -of -way. Their goal is to convey a message to the
traveling public in a manner that is as straight - forward and readable as possible without being a
visual "attraction ". The goal of the outdoor advertising sign is to be a visual attraction outside
the right -of -way, possibly making it a source of driver distraction. Nevertheless, the actual
change in crash rates influenced by the presence of any specific device has not been quantified in
a manner that fully isolates the impacts of an electronic sign. Recent studies conducted by
FHWA and others have cited the need for further research.
In the interest of promoting public safety, this report recommends that electronic signs be viewed
as a form of driver distraction and a public safety issue. Therefore, the ordinance
recommendations identified here should be considered. These recommendations should be
reviewed in the future as additional research becomes available.
With respect to regulatory measures for electronic outdoor advertising signs, it is important that
local governments take a thorough approach to updating their ordinances to address this issue.
For example, an ordinance that addresses sign motion, but does not address brightness and
intensity levels may leave the door open for further controversy. This report seeks to identify all
of the aspects of electronic outdoor advertising devices that are subject to regulation. It does not
specifically state what those regulations should be (e.g. the size of electronic signs), since these
are all things that policy makers and staff must take into careful consideration. Further, as driver
distraction and resulting influences on safety do not, in a practical sense, distinguish between on-
premise and off - premise signage, this distinction is not highlighted in the recommendations
below.
Regulatory Measures recommended for consideration
To properly address the issue of dynamic signage, it is recommended that the sign code address
the following:
Identify specific areas where dynamic signs are prohibited. This would typically be done
by specifying certain zoning districts where they are not allowed under any
circumstances. If dynamic signs are to be allowed in specific areas, this could be done by
zoning district (only higher level commercial districts are recommended for
consideration) or by zoning overlay related to specific purposes (e.g. entertainment or
sports facility district) or to specific roadway types.
2. Determine the acceptable level of operational modes in conjunction with such zoning
districts or overlays. The various levels include:
a. Static display only, with no transitions between messages,
b. Static display with fade or dissolve transitions, or transitions that do not have the
effect of moving text or images,
c. Static display with scrolling, traveling, spinning, zooming in, or similar special
effects that have the appearance of movement, animation, or changing in size, or get
revealed sequentially rather than all at once (e.g. letters dropping into place, etc.), and
#29
d. Full animation and video.
3. If one of the forms of static display is identified as the preferred operational mode, a
minimum display time should be established. This display time should correspond to the
operation roadway speed (rather than posted speed limit), allowing at most one image
transition during the time that the sign if visible to a driver traveling at the operational
speed.
If a shorter minimum display time is considered, the effects of message sequencing
should be considered. Wait intervals of more than 1 -2 seconds between sequenced
messages have the potential to become more of a distraction as viewers wait impatiently
for the next screen, in an effort to view the complete message.
4. If the community wishes to accommodate animation or video in some or all locations
where dynamic are permitted, a minimum and maximum duration of a video image
should be established. The purpose for establishing a time limit is to ensure that the
message is conveyed in a short, concise time frame that does not cause slowing of traffic
to allow drivers to see the entire message. Given the creativity of advertising, these video
images may be seen as a form of entertainment, and people typically like to see an
entertaining message through to the end.
Differentiate between zoning districts where dynamic signs are permitted by right, and
zoning districts, overlay districts, or special districts where they should only be allowed
through the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. A CUP would involve public
notification and review and approval by the Planning Commission. Other options would
include a design review board or other dispute resolution process.
5. Consider the establishment of minimum distance requirements between electronic
outdoor advertising devices in relation to the zoning district or roadway context in which
the signs are allowed.
6. Consider size limitations on dynamic signs for zoning districts where they are allowed.
This may vary from one district to another.
7. Consider if dynamic signs are allowed independently, or if they must be incorporated into
the body of another sign, and therefore become a limited percentage of the overall sign
face.
Establish a requirement for that all dynamic signs that emit light be equipped with
mechanisms that allow brightness to be set at specific nit levels and respond accurately to
changing light conditions. The City must establish the authority to disable or turn the
device off if it malfunctions in a manner that creates excessive glare or intensity that
causes visual interference or blind spots, and require that the device remain inoperable
until such time that the owner demonstrates to the appropriate city official that the device
is in satisfactory working condition. If such technology is not available, consideration
should be give to banning dynamic signs that emit light until such time as the technology
allows brightness levels to be precisely controlled.
430
9. Consider maximum brightness levels that correlate to ambient (day or night condition,
lighting of surrounding context) light levels. A maximum daytime and separate
nighttime nit/footcandle level should be established. Consider wording that requires the
sign to automatically adjust its nit level based on ambient light conditions.
10. Consider a requirement for a written certification from the sign manufacturer that the
individual sign's maximum light intensity has been preset not to exceed the maximum
daytime illumination levels established by the code, and that the maximum intensity level
is protected from end user manipulation by password protected software or other method
approved by the appropriate city official.
11. Require sign owners to provide an accurate field method of ensuring that maximum light
levels are not exceeded. If such a method cannot technically be provided, consider
banning dynamic signs that emit light until such time as the technology is available.
2431
PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR REVIEW BY CITY OF MINNETONKA
Further changes are anticipated following Signage Workshop
* *Preliminary Report is specific to City of Minnetonka issues and may not be sufficient to
address concerns in other communities **
APPENDICES
A32
PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR REVIEW BY CITY OF MINNETONKA
Further changes are anticipated following Signage Workshop
* *Preliminary Report is specific to City of Minnetonka issues and may not be sufficient to
address concerns in other communities **
Appendix A
Current Sign Technologies
A33
PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR REVIEW BY CITY OF MINNETONKA
Further changes are anticipated following Signage Workshop
"Preliminary Report is specific to City of Minnetonka issues and may not be sufficient to
address concerns in other communities"
Appendix A — Current Sign Technologies
Roadside signage has long been used to alert and direct travelers to retail businesses, lodging,
attractions and other destinations. Until the 20th century much of this image was "static" in
nature, presenting a single image that could only be altered by repainting or otherwise removing
an image and replacing it with another. With the advent of motorized travel, signage became
more "dynamic" or active in its efforts to attract the traveler's attention as they moved at ever
increasing speeds. Initially, motion was created by flashing bulbs or alternating sets of neon
tubes.
Today's technologies allow for an increasingly sophisticated display of images that can be
manipulated by a few strokes of a keyboard. Simpler forms of signs capable of displaying
multiple images include "tri- vision" signs which present a series of images through mechanical
rotation of multi -sided vertical strips. The rotation occurs at regular intervals presenting a series
of static images. Other forms are electronically produced, allowing for a wide range of colors,
messages and images depending on the level of technology, and typically produced by light
emitted by the sign face. Basic levels of technology present letters or numbers in a single color
of light, such as "time and temperature" signs or gas pricing signs. Many of these signs can
present longer images in a scrolling fashion, or can provide simple animations.
Recent advances have introduced a variety of technologies to the outdoor advertising arena. The
largest impact has been made with LED signs which offer an inexpensive yet powerful approach
that combines full motion, brilliant colors and a readable display. Other technologies are in
development, including "digital ink" signs that offer a changeable medium on a surface that
looks like a normal vinyl billboard. These signs manipulate ink on the surface, allowing for a
dynamic presentation of images without being internally illuminated.
The various sign technologies are referenced by a wide array of terms: "changeable message
signs," "electronic billboards," "animated signs." In general, this report focuses on the broad
range of signage types which are capable of displaying multiple images through electronic
manipulation, which we will refer to as "dynamic" signing. Reference to specific signage types
is made when necessary to discussion of specific issues (e.g. the brightness of LED signage).
&A4
PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR REVIEW BY CITY OF MINNETONKA
Further changes are anticipated following Signage Workshop
* *Preliminary Report is specific to City of Minnetonka issues and may not be sufficient to
address concerns in other communities **
Appendix B
Outdoor Advertising Sign Brightness Definitions
A35
PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR REVIEW BY CITY OF MINNETONKA
Further changes are anticipated following Signage Workshop
"Preliminary Report is specific to City of Minnetonka issues and may not be sufficient to
address concerns in other communities"
Appendix B — Outdoor Advertising Sign Brightness Definitions
This appendix defines various technical terms that are used to describe the operational
aspects of electronic billboards.
Billboard Illuminance
Billboard illumination is typically discussed using two terms: illuminance and luminance.
Because this section includes some technical jargon, a glossary that further defines terms
used in outdoor advertising is provided in Appendix C.
Illuminance: The amount of light that is incident to the surface of an object. This is the
method for describing ambient light levels or the amount of light that is projected onto a
front -lit sign. This parameter is typically measured in lux (footcandles x meters). For the
purposes of dimming, illuminance is discussed to describe the ambient light that hits the
photocell.
Luminance: The amount of light that emanates from an internally illuminated sign. This
parameter is measured in nits. The nit levels necessary for the sign to be legible vary with
the ambient light conditions. On a sunny day, the nit levels must be very high, while at night,
the levels must be very low to prevent the image from distorting and to prevent glare.
Billboard Luminance (Bri am)
Luminance is measured in nits (candelas /square meter) and describes how bright the image
is. In essence, it is the amount of light that is radiated from the sign divided by the amount of
surface area of the sign. No matter how big the sign is, the luminance of the sign is
consistent. For example, the brightness of computer monitors is also measured in nits.
The European standard "EN 12966" specifies that at certain ambient light levels, the sign
should output a given number of nits. There are different tables for each color due to the
properties of how the human eye interprets each color. The color that is most often used to
set dimming levels is white.
The FHWA has developed recommended practices for dynamic message signs installed
within the roadway right -of -way. The standard is NEMA's TS -4 "Hardware Standards for
Dynamic Message Signs (DMS) With NTCIP Requirements." Note that these standards
were prepared for message signs deployed within the roadway right -of -way and should not
be taken as recommended luminance levels for advertising signs. Table A -1 provides a
simplified version of the NEMA TS -4 standard for the color white.
AA6
PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR REVIEW BY CITY OF MINNETONKA
Further changes are anticipated following Signage Workshop
"Preliminary Report is specific to City of Minnetonka issues and may not be sufficient to
address concerns in other communities"
Table A -1 -Luminance Standards
Ambient
Approximate
Minimum
Maximum
Light
Light
Luminance
Luminance
(lux)
(nits)
(nits)
40,000
Sunlight
12,400
62,000
10,000
Cloudy
12,400
-
4,000
Overcast
2,200
11,000
400
Sunrise /Sunset
600
3,000
40
Candlelight
250
1,250
less than 4
Moonliuht
75
375
Source: NEMA TS -4 (2005)
Billboard Resolution
Billboards require far less resolution than print advertisements. For example, Clear
Channel's LED "Digital Outdoor Network" LED bulletin -size (14' x 48') billboards require
dimensions of only 208 pixels high by 720 pixels wide. If this image were to be printed at
300 dots per inch (dpi), a typical print resolution, the entire image would be less than
1.7 square inches. Therefore, it is ideal to keep the message on these signs simple and clear
because they do not currently allow resolutions similar to printed images.
Dimming
To maintain readability, the brightness of a sign must be adjusted to match ambient light
conditions. If this is not done, the image will appear too bright and can even degrade the
image quality through a phenomenon called "blooming." If the image blooms, the brightest
areas of the image bleed over into darker parts and the image clarity is degraded.
Dimming is typically controlled by a photocell, which measures the ambient light conditions
and varies the light output of the sign based on preconfigured settings. As ambient light
conditions darken, the photocell senses the decrease and lowers the light output of the sign.
Some sign manufacturers do not incorporate photocells in their electronic signs.
Electronic billboard dimming can also be controlled by scheduled dimming according to time
of day or manual dimming. On- premise signs may use any of these methods, but most, if not
all, off - premise standard size electronic billboards are auto dimmed by photocell. Some
signs include user - defined dimming curve capability allowing total control over sign
brightness and adjustability to accommodate local brightness ordinances.
Faltb
PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR REVIEW BY CITY OF MINNETONKA
Further changes are anticipated following Signage Workshop
"Preliminary Report is specific to City of Minnetonka issues and may not be sufficient to
address concerns in other communities"
Appendix C
Electronic Outdoor Advertising Device
Visual Performance Definitions
A38
PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR REVIEW BY CITY OF MINNETONKA
Further changes are anticipated following Signage Workshop
* *Preliminary Report is specific to City of Minnetonka issues and may not be sufficient to
address concerns in other communities **
Appendix C — Electronic Outdoor Advertising Device Visual Performance Definitions
Conspicuity
Conspicuity is the property that related to the contrast between a sign and its background and
its ability to stand out from its surroundings. This is a subjective property that depends on
many factors of both the environment and the viewer.
Contrast
Contrast is the property that defines the relationship between the brightness of the brightest
color possible to the darkest color possible on a sign. In times when ambient conditions are
very bright, such as a sunny day, the darkest color may still be very bright due to the sun's
reflection off the sign. In these cases, the lighter colored areas of the billboard's image must
be much brighter than the contrasting dark areas.
Le ibili
The ability of the driver to read a sign is related to its legibility. Large, legible text allows
the driver to read the billboard from varying distances and focus on the driving task.
Conversely, with small text the driver is more likely to focus on the sign for a longer period
of time and possibly wait until the sign is very close.
State departments of transportation use NEMA's TS -4 document for this criterion. This
document specifies many characteristics related to legibility including character height,
resolution and color.
Glare
Disability Glare
The first form of glare is disability glare. This occurs when a driver is exposed to a light
source so bright that it temporarily blinds the driver, impairing their ability to perform
driving tasks. This temporary blindness is brief, but can be dangerous.
Discomfort Glare
Discomfort glare is when a light source is bright enough to distract or encourage the driver to
look away from the light, but is not blinding. Discomfort glare is of particular concern in
cases where a bright sign is located in the same line of sight as a traffic sign, signal or
another vehicle.
PRELIMINARY DRAFT FOR REVIEW BY CITY OF MINNETONKA
Further changes are anticipated following Signage Workshop
"Preliminary Report is specific to City of Minnetonka issues and may not be sufficient to
address concerns in other communities"
Frequency of Chan
The frequency of change is determined by the interval of time between sign image changes.
The rate of change can usually be adjusted by the owner and operator of the sign. Frequency
of change is highly variable, with some on- premise signs changing faster than once per
second. While no standard is generally accepted, local government agencies have used
ordinances to limit the frequency to anywhere from 5 seconds to 24 hours.
Interactive signs
Interactive signs change their message based on the person viewing it. For example, the
carmaker MINI has installed variable message signs that display a customized message to car
owners who have special key dongles containing a radio frequency identification (RFID)
chips when the dongle is in close proximity to the sign.
Another example is a microphone system that identifies the radio stations passing drivers are
listening to and displays a specific message for that station.
UL L,