HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-2013-065 Billboards and Digital Signs Six-Month Moratorium - Public HearingRESOLUTION NO. R- 2013 -065
A RESOLUTION adopting Findings of Fact supporting a six -month moratorium, enacted
April 2, 2013 pursuant to emergency Ordinance No 2013 =13, adopting an
immediate moratorium on the acceptance of applications for the installation,
erection, construction, replacement, modification, or improvement of static
billboards and digital billboards using changing electronic, digital, or
changeable message copy, in all zoning districts within the City of Yakima;
and authorizing the City Manager to study and develop appropriate
comprehensive land use, licensing or registration regulations addressing
such issues for consideration by the City Council.
WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 36 70A.390 and RCW 35.63.200, the City Council of the
City of Yakima by unanimous vote of those present on April 2, 2013 adopted Ordinance
No. 2013 -13 imposing a moratorium for six months prohibiting the filing, acceptance and
issuance of development applications for the installation, erection, construction, replacement,
modification, or improvement of static billboards and digital billboards using changing electronic,
digital, or changeable message copy, in all zoning districts within the City of Yakima; and
WHEREAS, RCW 36.70A.390 and RCW 35.63.200 require the City Council to hold a
public hearing within sixty days after imposition of a moratorium to receive evidence and
testimony regarding imposition of the moratorium, to consider whether such moratorium should
be modified or continue in effect as originally adopted, and to adopt findings of fact supporting
such decision; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has held the required public hearing on May 21, 2013
pursuant to notice duly published, and having considered all evidence and testimony presented,
hereby makes the following:
Findings of Fact
1 The City Council of the City of Yakima has authority pursuant to RCW 36.70A.390
and RCW 35 63 200 to adopt a moratorium to preserve the status quo pending
development of comprehensive land use controls and regulations, health and safety
regulations, and business licensing or registration regulations and procedures,
concerning billboard and digital signs as defined in the moratorium ordinance
2. Existing codes and provisions in the Yakima Municipal Code do not adequately
address appropriate location or zoning of billboards and digital signs, determination
of any areas within the city where billboards and /or digital signs are inappropriate or
present an unmitigated intrusion upon the quiet use and enjoyment of property;
appropriate and comprehensive regulation of lighting and maintenance; appropriate
and comprehensive regulation of duration of digital images, brightness controls,
intermission periods between digital messages, and other factors creating or
contributing to driver distraction, pedestrian safety, and vehicular safety; appropriate
and comprehensive regulations to eliminate or mitigate visual blight; appropriate and
comprehensive regulation of signage within and upon any designated entryway
corridors into the city; development of regulations designed to promote downtown
and /or entryway beautification plans.
3. Digital signs and billboards or electronic variable message signs and billboards are
being installed throughout the United States, which signs include digital technology,
light emitting diodes ( "LEDs "), and electronic graphic displays that permit signs to
display an electronic image similar to a color television set and permit a displayed
image to quickly change from one image to another; changeable electronic message
billboards, which allow operators to change content from remote locations in a matter
of seconds Such signs and technologies are erected for the purpose of trying to get
the attention of pedestrians and motorists by changing messages and pictures for
short durations using a series of contrasting images produced mainly by LED
technologies. Such digital signs, without appropriate regulation, present a threat to
driver concentration by creating visual distraction, as shown by studies conducted by
outside entities or agencies. See, e.g., FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION,
"Research Review of Potential Safety Effects of Electronic Billboards on Driver
Attention and Distraction, " (Final Report, September 11, 2001).
4 The City is currently engaged in an extensive process to study and evaluate
modifications to its billboard regulations for both static and digital billboards, and in a
comprehensive review of sign standards and regulations pertaining to billboards in
conjunction with traffic safety and abatement of visual clutter within the downtown
core area, entryways into the City, and zoning districts within the City.
5. The City Council finds and determines that the City of Yakima needs time to consider
additional zoning regulations, health and safety regulations, and business licensing
regulations which would deal specifically with billboards and digital signs within the
City of Yakima, and the City Council therefore finds and determines that the
moratorium for the term of six months adopted and implemented in Ordinance No
2013 -13, commencing on April 2, 2013 and extending through October 1, 2013, is
necessary and appropriate in order to study the issues and to consider adopting
appropriate regulations.
6. The City Council finds and determines that imposition of the moratorium adopted
pursuant to Ordinance No. 2013 -13 is necessary to (a) provide the City with an
opportunity to study the issues regarding siting, zoning and regulation of billboards
and digital signs within the City of Yakima and to prepare appropriate revisions to the
City's codes and regulations; (b) to protect the health, safety and welfare of the
citizens of Yakima by avoiding and ameliorating negative impacts of the proliferation
of new billboards and digital signs, and (c) to avoid applicants possibly establishing
vested rights contrary to and inconsistent with any revisions the City may make to its
regulations and codes as a result of the City's study of this matter.
7. The City Council finds, determines and concludes that an emergency exists justifying
emergency adoption of Ordinance No 2013 -13, to wit: (a) existing city codes and
procedures are inadequate to provide for the receipt and processing of applications
for billboards and digital signs, designation of appropriate zoning districts or priority
of zoning districts for such uses, and protection of the general health, safety and
welfare of residents of the City of Yakima; (b) neither City staff nor the Planning
Commission have had sufficient opportunity to review the effects of permitting
billboards and digital signs or to formulate, prepare and recommend appropriate
zoning regulations, health and safety regulations, and business licensing regulations
which would deal specifically such uses within the City of Yakima; and (c) the
immediate imposition of this moratorium pursuant to Ordinance No 2013 -14 will
0
A'
preserve the status quo to enable the City to further study the effects of such uses
and to devise appropriate zoning and regulatory controls to address the effects of
such uses.
8. The City Council finds and determines that the moratorium adopted and
implemented pursuant to Ordinance No 2013 -13 should remain in effect according
to its terms, and that such is in the best interests of residents of the City of Yakima
and will promote the general health, safety and welfare; therefore
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YAKIMA:
The Findings of Fact set forth above are hereby adopted as the Findings of Fact
supporting the adoption, implementation and continuation of the moratorium adopted
April 2, 2013 pursuant to Ordinance No. 2013 -13 according to its terms.
2. The City Manager of the City of Yakima is hereby authorized and directed to perform
those duties and functions set forth in Ordinance No. 2013 -13, including but not
limited to, development of proposed comprehensive land use, licensing, and health
and safety regulations pertaining to billboards and digital signs and any issues
ancillary thereto.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 21St day of May, 2013
YAKItij�
� .oaxx�i.q
t,.
City Clerk V`��.��rrgr.;s
3
Micah Cawley Mayor
Y
BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
YAKIMA, WASHINGTON
AGENDA STATEMENT
Item No. 7
For Meeting of: 5/21/2013
ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing, and consideration of a Resolution adopting
findings of fact in support of moratorium regarding Billboards
and Digital Signs.
SUBMITTED BY: Jeff Cutter, City Attorney
Mark Kunkler, Senior Assistant City Attorney
SUMMARY EXPLANATION:
On April 2, 2013, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2013 -013 imposing a moratorium on
receipt, processing and issuance of permits for placement and erection of certain Billboards and
Digital Signs, as defined in the moratorium ordinance. State law requires that a public hearing
be held within 60 days after adoption of the moratorium. The purpose of the public hearing is to
receive public testimony and evidence as to whether the moratorium should remain unchanged
or modified Following the public hearing the City Council is asked to adopt a resolution setting
forth findings of fact supporting the moratorium as originally adopted or as modified. The
attached resolution sets forth proposed findings in support of the moratorium as originally
adopted If the moratorium is modified following the public hearing, the proposed resolution will
be modified to reflect any changes made by the City Council.
Resolution: X
Other (Specify):
Contract:
Start Date:
Item Budgeted:
Funding Source /Fiscal
Impact:
Strategic Priority:
Insurance Required? No
Mail to:
Phone:
Ordinance:
Contract Term:
End Date:
Amount:
APPROVED FOR
SUBMITTAL: City Manager
RECOMMENDATION:
Conduct Public Hearing, adopt Resolution.
ATTACHMENTS:
mom
0 Memo MORATORIUM BILLBOARDS Findings May 21 2013.doc
0 Resolution FINDINGS MORATORIUM Billboards May 21 2013.doc
L-1 2013-
013 Moratorium on Billboards and Di Set Hearing Date,.,pd
Description:
Memo - Moratorium Billboards - Findings May
21 2013
Resolution - Findings Moratorium - May 21
2013
2013-013 Moratorium on Billboards and
Digital Signs; Set Hearing Date
CITY OF YAKIMA
LEGAL
DEPARTMENT
200 South Third Street Yakima, Washuigton %Rn (509)575bQ30 F" (,"P75 61W
MEMORANDUM
May 9, 2013
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
Tony O'Rourke, City Manager
FROM: Mark Kunkler, Senior Assistant City Attorney
SUBJECT: Public Hearing — Moratorium — Billboards and Digital Signs
The City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2013 -013 on April 2, 2013. This ordinance imposed a
moratorium for up to six months prohibiting the filing, acceptance and issuance of development
applications for the installation, erection, construction, replacement, modification, or
improvement of static billboards and digital billboards using changing electronic, digital, or
changeable message copy, in all zoning districts within the City of Yakima.
Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.390 and RCW 35.63.200 authorizing the adoption of moratoria, the
City Council is required to hold a public hearing within sixty days after imposition of a
moratorium. The purpose of the public hearing is to receive evidence and testimony regarding
imposition of the moratorium, to consider whether such moratorium should be modified or
continue in effect as originally adopted, and to adopt findings of fact supporting such decision.
To honor this requirement, a public record has been scheduled for May 21, 2013.
Included within this agenda item is a Resolution that adopts proposed findings of fact
supporting the adoption of the moratorium. If the City Council determines, after receipt of
public testimony, comment or evidence, that the original moratorium should be modified in
scope, length or effect, the proposed findings will be modified to reflect the decision of the City
Council.
Attached for your reference are copies of the following documents:
(a) Resolution adopting proposed findings of fact in support of the moratorium adopted
April 2, 2013 per Ordinance No. 2013 -013.
(b) Ordinance No. 2013 -013 (moratorium ordinance).
(c) Memorandum dated April 2, 2013, cover memorandum for Ordinance No. 2013 -013.
RESOLUTION NO. R -2013-
A RESOLUTION adopting Findings of Fact supporting a six -month moratorium, enacted
April 2, 2013 pursuant to emergency Ordinance No. 2013 -13, adopting an
immediate moratorium on the acceptance of applications for the
installation, erection, construction, replacement, modification, or
improvement of static billboards and digital billboards using changing
electronic, digital, or changeable message copy, in all zoning districts within
the City of Yakima; and authorizing the City Manager to study and develop
appropriate comprehensive land use, licensing or registration regulations
addressing such issues for consideration by the City Council.
WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 36.70A.390 and RCW 35.63.200, the City Council of the
City of Yakima by unanimous vote of those present on April 2, 2013 adopted Ordinance
No. 2013 -13 imposing a moratorium for six months prohibiting the filing, acceptance and
issuance of development applications for the installation, erection, construction, replacement,
modification, or improvement of static billboards and digital billboards using changing electronic,
digital, or changeable message copy, in all zoning districts within the City of Yakima; and
WHEREAS, RCW 36.70A.390 and RCW 35.63.200 require the City Council to hold a
public hearing within sixty days after imposition of a moratorium to receive evidence and
testimony regarding imposition of the moratorium, to consider whether such moratorium should
be modified or continue in effect as originally adopted, and to adopt findings of fact supporting
such decision; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has held the required public hearing on May 21, 2013
pursuant to notice duly published, and having considered all evidence and testimony presented,
hereby makes the following:
Findings of Fact
1. The City Council of the City of Yakima has authority pursuant to RCW 36.70A.390
and RCW 35.63.200 to adopt a moratorium to preserve the status quo pending
development of comprehensive land use controls and regulations, health and safety
regulations, and business licensing or registration regulations and procedures,
concerning billboard and digital signs as defined in the moratorium ordinance.
2. Existing codes and provisions in the Yakima Municipal Code do not adequately
address: appropriate location or zoning of billboards and digital signs; determination
of any areas within the city where billboards and /or digital signs are inappropriate or
present an unmitigated intrusion upon the quiet use and enjoyment of property;
appropriate and comprehensive regulation of lighting and maintenance; appropriate
and comprehensive regulation of duration of digital images, brightness controls,
intermission periods between digital messages, and other factors creating or
contributing to driver distraction, pedestrian safety, and vehicular safety; appropriate
and comprehensive regulations to eliminate or mitigate visual blight; appropriate and
comprehensive regulation of signage within and upon any designated entryway
corridors into the city; development of regulations designed to promote downtown
and /or entryway beautification plans.
3. Digital signs and billboards or electronic variable message signs and billboards are
being installed throughout the United States, which signs include digital technology,
light emitting diodes ( "LEDs "), and electronic graphic displays that permit signs to
display an electronic image similar to a color television set and permit a displayed
image to quickly change from one image to another; changeable electronic message
billboards, which allow operators to change content from remote locations in a
matter of seconds. Such signs and technologies are erected for the purpose of
trying to get the attention of pedestrians and motorists by changing messages and
pictures for short durations using a series of contrasting images produced mainly by
LED technologies. Such digital signs, without appropriate regulation, present a
threat to driver concentration by creating visual distraction, as shown by studies
conducted by outside entities or agencies. See, e.g., FEDERAL HIGHWAY
ADMINISTRATION, "Research Review of Potential Safety Effects of Electronic
Billboards on Driver Attention and Distraction," (Final Report, September 11, 2001).
4. The City is currently engaged in an extensive process to study and evaluate
modifications to its billboard regulations for both static and digital billboards, and in a
comprehensive review of sign standards and regulations pertaining to billboards in
conjunction with traffic safety and abatement of visual clutter within the downtown
core area, entryways into the City, and zoning districts within the City.
5. The City Council finds and determines that the City of Yakima needs time to
consider additional zoning regulations, health and safety regulations, and business
licensing regulations which would deal specifically with billboards and digital signs
within the City of Yakima, and the City Council therefore finds and determines that
the moratorium for the term of six months adopted and implemented in Ordinance
No. 2013 -13, commencing on April 2, 2013 and extending through October 1, 2013,
is necessary and appropriate in order to study the issues and to consider adopting
appropriate regulations.
6. The City Council finds and determines that imposition of the moratorium adopted
pursuant to Ordinance No. 2013 -13 is necessary to (a) provide the City with an
opportunity to study the issues regarding siting, zoning and regulation of billboards
and digital signs within the City of Yakima and to prepare appropriate revisions to
the City's codes and regulations; (b) to protect the health, safety and welfare of the
citizens of Yakima by avoiding and ameliorating negative impacts of the proliferation
of new billboards and digital signs; and (c) to avoid applicants possibly establishing
vested rights contrary to and inconsistent with any revisions the City may make to its
regulations and codes as a result of the City's study of this matter.
7. The City Council finds, determines and concludes that an emergency exists
justifying emergency adoption of Ordinance No 2013 -13, to wit: (a) existing city
codes and procedures are inadequate to provide for the receipt and processing of
applications for billboards and digital signs, designation of appropriate zoning
districts or priority of zoning districts for such uses, and protection of the general
health, safety and welfare of residents of the City of Yakima; (b) neither City staff nor
the Planning Commission have had sufficient opportunity to review the effects of
permitting billboards and digital signs or to formulate, prepare and recommend
appropriate zoning regulations, health and safety regulations, and business licensing
regulations which would deal specifically such uses within the City of Yakima; and
(c) the immediate imposition of this moratorium pursuant to Ordinance No. 2013 -14
will preserve the status quo to enable the City to further study the effects of such
uses and to devise appropriate zoning and regulatory controls to address the effects
of such uses.
8. The City Council finds and determines that the moratorium adopted and
implemented pursuant to Ordinance No. 2013 -13 should remain in effect according
to its terms, and that such is in the best interests of residents of the City of Yakima
and will promote the general health, safety and welfare; therefore
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YAKIMA:
The Findings of Fact set forth above are hereby adopted as the Findings of Fact
supporting the adoption, implementation and continuation of the moratorium adopted
April 2, 2013 pursuant to Ordinance No. 2013 -13 according to its terms.
2. The City Manager of the City of Yakima is hereby authorized and directed to perform
those duties and functions set forth in Ordinance No. 2013 -13, including but not
limited to, development of proposed comprehensive land use, licensing, and health
and safety regulations pertaining to billboards and digital signs and any issues
ancillary thereto.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 21St day of May, 2013.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Micah Cawley, Mayor
ORDINANCE NO. 2013 -013
AN ORDINANCE relating to land use and zoning; adopting an immediate moratorium on the
acceptance of applications for the installation, erection, construction,
replacement, modification, or improvement of static billboards and digital
billboards using changing electronic, digital, or changeable message
copy, in all zoning districts; such moratorium to be effective for six
months, through October 1, 2013; exempting from such moratorium
vested applications for billboard installation or billboard relocation permits,
and applications for repair of existing billboards for purposes or
implementation of safety improvements mandated by state or federal
standards; declaring an emergency in the passage of this ordinance
providing for immediate effective date; and setting May 21, 2013 as the
date for the public hearing on the moratorium.
WHEREAS, RCW 36.70A.390 and RCW 35.63.200 authorize the City Council to adopt
an ordinance imposing a moratorium and provide a process for public hearing which must be
held within sixty days of the date of adoption of the moratorium; and
WHEREAS, the City of Yakima ( "City ") has previously adopted ordinances codified at
Chapter 15.08 of the Yakima Municipal Code ( "YMC ") regulating signs and displays on signs in
all zoning districts to reduce traffic hazards and visual blight; and
WHEREAS, billboards are currently permitted in several zoning districts in the City as
described pursuant to YMC 15.08.130; and
WHEREAS, digital signs and billboards or electronic variable message signs and
billboards are being installed throughout the United States that include digital technology, light
emitting diodes ( "LEDs "), and electronic graphic displays that permit signs to display an
electronic image similar to a color television set and permit a displayed image to quickly change
from one image to another; and
WHEREAS, changeable electronic message billboards, which allow operators to change
content from remote locations in a matter of seconds, are erected for the purpose of trying to get
the attention of pedestrians and motorists by changing messages and pictures for short
durations using a series of contrasting images produced mainly by LED technologies; and
WHEREAS, the City is currently engaged in an extensive process to study and evaluate
modifications to its billboard regulations for both static and digital billboards; and
WHEREAS, the City is currently engaged in a comprehensive review of sign standards
and regulations pertaining to billboards in conjunction with traffic safety and abatement of visual
clutter within the downtown core area, entryways into the City, and zoning districts within the
City;
WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that current City codes and
regulations do not adequately address static billboards, digital billboards, changeable electronic
message billboards and billboards using such electronic LED technologies; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that a immediate moratorium is necessary and
appropriate within all zoning districts of the City to preserve the status quo and prevent
significant investment pending the development of a comprehensive code and regulations
pertaining to static billboards and changing electronic, digital, or changeable message
billboards; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that such moratorium shall not apply
to applications for new billboards or permits for relocation of existing billboards that have vested
prior to the effective date of this ordinance, permit applications to conduct repair of existing
billboards, and permit applications to implement safety improvements for existing billboards as
mandated by state or federal standards; and
WHEREAS, the adoption of such moratorium is exempt from SEPA threshold
determination as an emergency action pursuant to WAC 197 -11 -880, but subject to further
SEPA review and determination as deemed appropriate by the SEPA responsible official; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds, determines and concludes that an emergency exists,
to wit: (a) the City has received proposals for installation of static and electronic billboards within
the City; (b) neither City staff nor the Planning Commission have had sufficient opportunity to
review the effects of static and electronic billboards with regard to concerns for economic
development, preservation and /or promotion of traffic and pedestrian safety, prevention of visual
clutter and public nuisances associated with inadequate code provisions and regulation of static
and electronic billboards, and development of a comprehensive plan, program or regulation of
static and electronic billboards within all zoning districts of the City; and (c) the immediate
imposition of this moratorium will preserve the status quo to enable the City to further study the
effects of such uses and to devise appropriate zoning and regulatory controls to address the
effects of such uses; and
WHEREAS, the City Council authorizes and directs the City Manager to review existing
City codes and zoning regulations, further study the effects resulting from location of static and
electronic billboards within the boundaries of the City, prepare comprehensive proposed
amendments to the City codes and zoning regulations to address the effects of such uses, to
confer with community members and City advisory commissions as appropriate, and to present
recommended legislation addressing such issues to the City Council for consideration and
action; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that a public hearing on this
moratorium should be held on May 21, 2013, whereupon the City Council may adopt findings of
fact in support of the adoption of this moratorium, or modify the terms thereof; and
WHEREAS, notwithstanding the term of six months set forth above for the moratorium
adopted herein, this moratorium may at any time hereafter be (a) modified by the City Council in
accordance with applicable law; (b) extended for additional term(s) of six months upon action
following public hearing and adoption of findings in support thereof; (c) terminated by the City
Council upon adoption of appropriate zoning and regulatory codes; or (d) terminated by the City
Council for any reason deemed necessary or appropriate; now, therefore:
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF YAKIMA:
Section 1. Recitals Adopted as Findings. The "Whereas" recitals above are
hereby adopted as the City Council's findings of fact as if fully set forth herein.
Section 2. Moratorium Adopted. A moratorium is hereby adopted on the
receipt of applications, permitting, installation, erection or construction of (a) any new off-
2
premises static billboard, including billboards displaying static printed message and material,
within all zoning districts of the City, and (b) on- premises and off - premises digital billboards
consisting of or including changing electronic, digital, or changeable message billboards in all
zoning districts within the City, and (c) the alteration, modification, or replacement of any
existing billboard, so that the existing billboard (as altered or modified) uses changing electronic,
digital or video display or flashing, motion, animated, or changeable electronic variable message
copy. Static copy on existing billboards may continue to be changed.
Section 3. Definitions. For purposes of this moratorium, "static billboard" means an
off - premises sign greater than 72 square feet in size. This type of sign displaying static printed
message and material, and is generally composed of poster panels or bulletins mounted on a
building wall or free - standing structure, or painted directly on the wall or free - standing structure.
"Digital billboard" means an on- premises or off - premises sign greater than 72 square feet in
size, utilizing changing electronic, digital or video display or flashing, motion, animated, or
changeable electronic variable message copy, or digital message technology capable of
changing the message or copy on the sign electronically.
In addition to the above definitions and as necessary to interpret or apply this Ordinance, the
City hereby adopts those definitions and provisions of the Yakima Municipal Code pertaining to
land use, zoning, design and regulation, including without limitation the provisions and
definitions in Chapter 15.08 YMC.
Section 4. Exemption — Vested Rights — Repair and Mandated Safety
Improvements. The moratorium shall not apply to applications for new billboards or
permits for relocation of existing billboards that have vested prior to the effective date of this
ordinance, permit applications to conduct repair of existing billboards, and permit applications to
implement safety improvements for existing billboards as mandated by state or federal
standards.
Section 5. Public Hearing. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.390 and RCW 35.63.200, a
public hearing will be held on Tuesday, May 21, 2013, for the purpose of taking testimony and, if
this ordinance is passed, adopting written findings and conclusions justifying the moratorium
established by this ordinance.
Section 6. Effective Period of Moratorium. The moratorium adopted by this
ordinance shall become effective immediately upon passage and approval of this ordinance,
and shall remain in effect for six months, through October 1, 2013, subject to adoption of
findings and conclusions as provided in Section 5 above. This moratorium shall also terminate
upon the adoption of permanent regulations governing the location, land use and regulation of
drive - through facilities within the Downtown Yakima Business Improvement District.
Notwithstanding the above, this moratorium may be extended as provided in RCW 36.70A.390
and RCW 35.63.200.
Section 7. Directive to City Manager. The City Council hereby authorizes and
directs the City Manager to review existing City codes and zoning regulations; to further study
the effects resulting from billboards and digital billboards; to prepare comprehensive proposed
amendments to the City codes and zoning regulations to address the effects of such uses; to
confer with community members and City advisory commissions as appropriate; and to present
recommended legislation addressing such issues to the City Council for consideration and
action.
Section 8. Declaration of Emergency. Pursuant to Article VI Section 2 of the
Charter of the City of Yakima, the City Council finds, determines and declares that this
ordinance is an emergency ordinance to provide for the immediate preservation of the public
peace, property, health or safety. The unanimous vote of the City Council shall be necessary for
the passage of this emergency ordinance.
Section 9. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance
should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity of constitutionality of any other section,
sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance.
Section 10. Ordinance to be Transmitted to Department. Pursuant to RCW
36.70A.106, this Ordinance shall be transmitted to the Washington State Department of
Commerce as required by law or otherwise posted, published or recorded as permitted by law.
Section 11. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect
immediately upon its passage and approval as provided by law and the City Charter.
PASSED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THE CITY COUNCIL, signed and approved this
2nd day of April, 2013.
✓��r'
Ca.
Mica Ca ey, Mayor
ATTEST:
By 2
City Clerk ': 1
Effective Date: April 2, 2013
Publication Date: April 5, 2013 .�
Ordinance Approved by Unanimous Vote
of Council Members: April 2, 2013
4
Distributed at the
CITY OF YAKIMA !Meet_ ing
LEGAL
DEPARTMENT
200 Sot fl Third Street Yala n Washington 98901 (509)575.6(M Fa)c (509P5-6160
PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL: COVERED BY THE ATTORNEY - CLIENT AND ATTORNEY
WORK PRODUCT PRIVILEGES
MEMORANDUM
April 2, 2013
TO Honorable Mayor and City Council
Tony O'Rourke, City Manager
FROM: Mark Kunkler, Senior Assistant City Attorney
SUBJECT Moratorium — "Billboards" and Digital Signs
A. Scope of Moratorium.
The City Council has asked staff to develop a proposed ordinance enacting a
moratorium on the approval and installation of "billboards." The attached proposed
ordinance would impose a six -month moratorium on the receipt of applications for,
approval of, and installation of the following signs.
(a) Any new sign, greater than 72 square feet in size, using "static" print
and /or pictures, for the advertising of any product or service not made or
provided on the premises of the property where the sign is located. (This is
known as an "off- premises" advertising sign. Most signs commonly known as
"billboards" are off - premises advertising signs )
(b) Any new sign, greater than 72 square feet in size, for the advertising of
any product or service, whether made or provided on- premises or off - premises,
where the sign uses changing electronic, digital, or changeable message copy.
The city's current code does not provide a definition of "billboard." The current code
simply states that a billboard cannot exceed 300 square feet in size and must comply
with certain proximity and maintenance standards. The current code does not
specifically state that billboards are limited to off - premises advertising.
The city's current code has definitions for "changing message center sign," "electrical
sign," and "flashin,g sign," but does not regulate any such signs. YMC 15.08.020.
Memorandum to Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
April 2, 2013
Page 2
B. Signs Not Affected by Moratorium.
The effect of the moratorium will leave available the following types of signs:
On- premises advertising signs (that use "static" or printed copy and /or
pictures) will be allowed in accordance with the existing city codes. (The
moratorium would only stop placement of "static" off - premises advertising
signs that exceed 72 square feet in size.)
• On- premises or off - premises advertising signs 72 square feet or less in
size, which use changing electronic, digital, or changeable message copy,
would be allowed in accordance with existing city codes. (Only digital signs
greater than 72 square feet in size would be subject to the moratorium.)
The "72 square feet" standard has been drawn from a similar moratorium ordinance
adopted by the City of Tacoma.'
C. Reasons for Moratorium.
A number of scientific studies have recently become available describing the potential
for driver distraction associated with electronic billboards These are currently being
reviewed by staff, but a comprehensive study is necessary. Staff and the Planning
Commission will need time to properly study and assess these reports.2
Current code provisions do not define "billboards," nor make any reference to whether
such signs are limited to off - premises advertising In fact, YMC 15.08.130 is entitled
"Off- premises signs and billboards," creating an ambiguity as to whether "off- premises
signs" are different from "billboards."
As noted above, current code has definitions for "changing message center sign,"
"electrical sign," and "flashing sign," but does not regulate any signs on such basis
Without a moratorium, the city is without sufficient existing means to regulate billboards
and larger digital signs.
' City of Tacoma Ordinance Nos. 27982 (May 17, 2011), and 28009 (August 9, 2011)
2 See, e.g., FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION, "Research Review of Potential Safety Effects of Electronic
Billboards on Driver Attention and Distraction," (Final Report, September 11, 2001)
Memorandum to Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
April 2, 2013
Page 3
D. Recommendation.
The attached ordinance would establish a moratorium crafted to reach off - premises
billboard signs greater than 72 square feet in size, and on- premises /off - premises
electronic or digital signs greater than 72 square feet in area.
The proposed. moratorium would allow on- premises signs (using static copy or
message) to be processed under existing city codes. It would also allow on-
premises /off - premises electronic signs (72 square feet or less) to be processed in
accordance with existing city codes. The scope of the proposed moratorium is intended
to reach "larger" static signs, together with electronic signs greater than 72 feet in area,
and leave room for businesses to proceed with appropriate on- premises sign
application and installation.
Under state statutes governing moratoria, a public hearing must be held within 60 days
to receive comment and testimony regarding the moratorium and its scope. A public
hearing will be set for May 21, 2013 for these purposes.
Under the City Charter, adoption of a moratorium is an "emergency ordinance" that
must be approved by the unanimous vote of all Council members considering the
action Charter, Article VI, Section 2.
;Distributed al the
r: r Meeting D
__ _ �j /�� ;I
May 21, 2013
Steve Osguthope, Director of Community Development
City Hall - 2nd Floor
129N 2nd St
Yakima, WA 98901
RE: Moratorium regarding Billboards and Digital Signs
Dear Mr. Osguthope:
MAY 21 2013
OFFICE OF CITY COUNCIL
This letter is in response to the proposed moratorium regarding billboards and digital signs being
discussed at this evenings City Council meeting. As an introduction, I will provide a brief synopsis on our
history in the Yakima market regarding outdoor advertising.
My family owned and operated all of the billboards in the Yakima market in the 1960's operating as
Grover Outdoor Advertising. Eventually our company was acquired and is now operated as CBS Outdoor.
In the early 1990's, my father Steve joined a company called Obie Media. He again developed several
new locations in Yakima. I joined this company in 1991 and also developed several new billboard
locations. Obie Media was eventually sold to Lamar and they are the current operator of those
locations. In all, my estimation is that a minimum of 95% of the billboards in Yakima were developed by
my father Steve or me. We always felt that the regulations regarding billboards were effective and
protected the integrity of the marketplace by not allowing an influx of billboard displays.
Also during this time, my father Steve was instrumental in the writing and passage of the existing code
that is currently in place regulating billboards. He diligently worked with the staff at that time and they
developed a new code which is in place today. The current code is quite restrictive and regulates the
zones in which billboards can be built on, the size, height, illumination, and spacing from other
billboards which is 500'. It also regulates distance from residential which is a minimum of 300'. These
two distances are very aggressive and make finding any new locations in Yakima that meet this criteria
extremely difficult. I have worked in several cities across the country developing billboard locations from
large to small and the code currently in place in Yakima is one of the most restrictive I have worked with.
Over the past 2.5 years, there has been one new billboard permit issued, however, this was just a permit
to upgrade an existing structure. All in all, the last new billboard permits go back to my company which
was back in 2009. There is no substantive issue regarding billboards in Yakima as shown by the number
of permits issued over the past four years. As stated above, there are very few properties in Yakima that
would even qualify as a legal location due to the current restrictive regulations. Billboard companies lose
locations through attrition over time and need to have a code in place that allows the relocation or new
development to replace lost locations and maintain their business.
What I have noticed is that the definition of signs with the staff in Yakima is getting a bit off track. There
are two types of signs in any city and they are on- premise and off - premise. Obviously, billboards fall into
the category of off- premise and advertise goods and services not on the property in which the display is
located. I would strongly disagree that considering all signs over 72 square feet as billboards is a rational
and effective way to regulate signs. The on- premise sign code should regulate signs identifying the
businesses on the property and the off - premise sign code should regulate billboards. This is how 99% of
the codes across the country are written and provide the necessary delineation between the two.
There are three main companies operating billboards in Yakima which are CBS Outdoor, Lamar, and
Metro Outdoor. There are two other companies that have one to two locations each. Yakima is not
overrun by billboards and the market is not overbuilt. I would agree that the on- premise sign code
needs to be addressed as they do not appear to have much regulation. They are allowed to overhang
the right -of -way and there seems to be a lot of leeway regarding the types of signs which are allowed.
All three of the companies listed above are vested in Yakima and provide a great service to the
businesses in the marketplace. We use local vendors and take pride in the appearance and success of
Yakima. We would all like to be part of any discussions regarding a potential change to the current
regulations and feel that a study group including staff and industry representatives would be most
beneficial for all.
I appreciate you taking the time to review my comments and look forward to the opportunity to meet in
person and discuss the current code and how best we can all move forward in a positive and beneficial
manner. I respectfully request that this letter be provide to council members at the City Council
meeting this evening and be read to the public in attendance. 1 would have attended this meeting but
was not able due to a family emergency.
Sincerely,
Peter A. Grover
Owner
Metro Outdoor, LLC
Distributed at the #�7
Meeting
Statistical Analysis of the Relationship between
®n- Premise Digital Signage and Traffic Safety
by
H. Gene Hawkins, Jr., Ph.D., P.E.
Associate Professor and Research Engineer
Zachry Department of Civil Engineering
Texas A &M University
Pei -Fen Kuo
Graduate Research Assistant
Texas A &M Transportation Institute
and
Dominique Lord, Ph.D.
Associate Professor and Research Engineer
Zachry Department of Civil Engineering
Texas A &M University
Sponsored by
Signage Foundation, Inc.
P.O. Box 14392
Washington, DC 20044
Texas Engineering Extension Service
The Texas A &M University System
College Station, TX 77843
December 17, 2012
1
DISCLAIMER
The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and
accuracy of the information presented herein. This document is disseminated under the
sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation University Transportation Centers
Program in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for
the contents or use thereof. The U.S. Government and the State of Texas do not endorse products
or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers' names appear herein solely because they are
considered essential to the object of this report.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors wish to recognize the Signage Foundation, Inc., for providing the funding for this
research effort. The authors also wish to acknowledge the sign companies that provided
proprietary information regarding the installation of the digital signs that were used to create the
databases analyzed in this project. Although they are not recognized by name in order to protect
the proprietary nature of the information, their contributions are greatly appreciated.
11
ABBREVIATIONS
The abbreviations shown below are used in this report.
AADT Annual Average Daily Traffic
ADT Average Daily Traffic
AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
AIC Akaike Information Criterion
ANOVA Analysis of Variance
BIC Bayesian Information Criterion
CEVMS Commercial Electronic Variable Message Signs
CG Control Group
DF Degrees of Freedom
EB Empirical Bayes
EBB Electronic Billboard
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
HSIS Highway Safety Information System
HSM Highway Safety Manual
LCD Liquid Crystal Display
LED Light- Emitting Diode
MS Mean of Sum of Squares
MSE Error Mean Square
MST Treatment Mean Square
RTM Regression to the Mean
SAR Spatial Autoregressive Model
SEM Spatial Error Model
SFI Signage Foundation, Inc.
SPF Safety Performance Function
SS Sum of Squares
SSE Sum of Squares for Error
SST Total Sum of Squares
TTI Texas A &M Transportation Institute
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Listof Figures .................................................................................................. ............................... v
Listof Tables .................................................................................................. ...............................
vi
ExecutiveSummary ....................................................................................... ...............................
vii
Chapter1: Introduction .................................................................................... ...............................
1
ResearchApproach .................................................................................... ...............................
1
Descriptionof a Digital Sign ..................................................................... ...............................
1
Research Activities and Report Organization ............................................ ...............................
2
Chapter 2: Background Information ................................................................ ............................... 3
On- Premise Digital Signs .......................................................................... ...............................
3
Off - Premise Digital Signs ......................................................................................................... 4
SafetyEffects ....................................................................................... ............................... 4
Characteristics of the Evaluation Methods Used in Previous Studies . ...............................
7
Chapter3: Study Data ...................................................................................... ............................... 9
CrashData .................................................................................................. ............................... 9
SignData .................................................................................................. ...............................
11
Data - Merging Procedure .......................................................................... ...............................
12
Chapter 4: Study Methodology ...................................................................... ...............................
16
A Before -After Study and a Cross - Sectional Study ................................ ...............................
16
TheBefore -After Study ..................................................................... ...............................
16
Common Methods for Conducting a Before -After Study ........................ ...............................
18
NaiveMethod ..................................................................................... ...............................
18
ControlGroup Method ....................................................................... ......•........................
19
EmpiricalBayes Method .................................................................... ...............................
20
Calculation Procedures and Examples ..................................................... ...............................
21
Chapter5: Results .......................................................................................... ...............................
25
Individual and Combined Results ............................................................ ...............................
25
Results for Crashes Related to Multiple and Single Vehicles ................. ...............................
28
Results for Crashes Related to Different Types of Signs ........................ ...............................
29
Impactof Sign Hold Time ....................................................................... ............................... 32
Chapter 6: Summary and Conclusions ........................................................... ............................... 34
Chapter7: References .................................................................................... ............................... 36
Appendix A: Step -By -Step Instructions for Students to Record Sign Data .. ............................... 39
Appendix B: Statistical Symbols ................................................................... ............................... 41
IV
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 1. Summary of study results .............................................................. ............................... viii
Figure 2. The flow chart for data collection and merging procedure ............ ............................... 13
Figure 3. Example work table of site data collection ..................................... ............................... 15
Figure 4. A comparison of sample sizes from similar studies ....................... ............................... 26
Figure 5. The safety effectiveness index and the 95 percent confidence interval for each
state(all crash types) ....................................................................... ............................... 27
Figure 6. The safety effectiveness index and the 95 percent confidence interval for each
state (multi - vehicle crashes) ...................................•---.................... ............................... 28
Figure 7. The safety effectiveness index and the 95 percent confidence interval for each
state (single-vehicle crashes .................................... ............................... 29
Figure 8. The histogram of digital signs for each sign dimension ................. ............................... 31
Figure 9. Example screenshot of Google Maps ............................................. ............................... 40
Figure 10. Example screenshot of Google Earth ........................................... ............................... 40
v
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table I. Safety effects of off - premise digital signs ......................................... ............................... 6
Table 2. HSIS crash coverage and roadway length by state .......................... ............................... 10
Table 3. Coefficients for multi and single - vehicle crash regression model ... ............................... 22
Table 4. Sign site sample size yield ............................................................... ............................... 26
Table 5. Results of statistical analysis of before -after crash condition .......... ............................... 27
Table 6. The typical form of a one -way ANOVA table ................................ ............................... 30
Table 7. Analysis of variance table ( color) .................................................... ............................... 31
Table 8. Analysis of variance table (sign dimension) .................................... ............................... 32
Table 9. Analysis of variance table (six business types) ............................... ............................... 32
Table 10. Analysis of variance table (two business types) ............................ ............................... 32
Table 11. Summary of sign hold times .......................................................... ............................... 33
Table 12. Example work table of site data collection procedure ................... ............................... 39
vi
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The use of digital on- premise signs, which are typically business- related signs that have the
ability to change the displayed message, has increased significantly in recent years. On- premise
digital signs are located on the same property as the businesses they promote, and some part —
or a significant part in some cases — of the sign contains a digital display that can be
programmed to change the message at pre -set intervals. Because the use of these signs has
increased, jurisdictions have used local sign codes or ordinances to regulate the manner in which
digital messages are displayed. Jurisdictions typically justify these regulations by citing traffic
safety impacts. However, no comprehensive and scientifically based research efforts have
evaluated the relationship between on- premise digital signs and traffic safety.
In this study, researchers collected large amounts of sign and crash data in order to conduct a
robust statistical analysis of the safety impacts of on- premise digital signs. The statistical tools
used the latest safety analysis theory developed for analyzing the impacts of highway safety
improvements. The research team acquired the crash data from the Highway Safety Information
System, which is a comprehensive database of crash records from several states. One of the
advantages of these data is that they also include information about roadway characteristics, such
as the number of lanes, speed limit, and other factors. The research team then acquired
information about the location of on- premise digital signs from two sign manufacturing
companies. Through significant effort by the researchers, these two datasets were merged into a
single dataset that represented potential study locations in California, North Carolina, Ohio, and
Washington. Of the initial set of over 3,000 possible sites, the research team was able to identify
135 sign locations that could be used for the safety analysis. Potential sites were eliminated from
consideration due to any of the following factors:
The sign location was not on a roadway that was included in the crash dataset; only major
roads were represented in the crash data.
The sign location provided by a sign manufacturing company could not be verified
through online digital images of the location.
Only signs installed in calendar years 2006 or 2007 could be included in order to have
adequate amounts of crash data before and after the sign was installed.
The research team then used the empirical Bayes method to perform a before -after statistical
analysis of the safety impacts of the on- premise digital signs. In a before -after study, the safety
impact of a treatment (in this case, the installation of an on- premise digital sign) is defined by the
change in crashes between the periods before and after the treatment was installed. However,
simply comparing the crash frequencies (known as a naive before -after analysis) is not adequate
to account for factors such as regression to the mean (a statistical concept that explains why after
data can be closer to the mean value than the before data) and to provide a means of controlling
for external factors that can also cause a difference in crash frequencies. The empirical Bayes
method represents the recommended procedure for evaluating the impacts of safety treatments
because it overcomes the deficiencies of the naive method. The safety impacts are represented by
the safety index, which is indicated by the symbol 0. In simple terms, the safety index represents
a ratio of safety in the after period compared to safety in the before period, although it is not as
vii
simple as dividing the crashes in the after period by the crashes in the before period. A safety
index greater than 1.0 indicates an increase in crashes in the after period, and a value less than
1.0 indicates a reduction in crashes in the after period. However, because of the variability in the
crash data, the analysis must have statistical validity. Statistical variability is established by
defining the 95 percent confidence interval for the safety index, which is based on factors such as
sample size and the variability of the data. If the 95 percent confidence interval includes the
value of 1.0, then there is a 95 percent chance that there is no statistically significant change in
crashes between the before and after periods.
The results of the statistical analysis are presented in Figure 1. This figure shows that the safety
index for all of the states was 1.0 with a 95 percent confidence interval that ranged from 0.93 to
1.07. This indicates that, for the 135 sites included in the analysis, there was no statistically
significant change in crashes due to the installation of on- premise digital signs. The same can
also be said about the results for each of the four states on an individual basis because the
confidence interval for safety index for each state includes 1.0. The larger confidence intervals
for some of the states are due to greater variability in the data and/or smaller sample sizes. The
researchers also analyzed single - vehicle and multi - vehicle crashes and found the same result of
no statistically significant change in crashes. Finally, the researchers performed an analysis of
variance for the sign factors of color, size, and type of business and found no statistically
significant differences in the mean safety index values for individual factors.
3.0 -i -- --- — ------------------------------ - — -- -- -,. -
- - - - -` '--------------------------------- . - -: -- -- u > >er hound - - --
I
2.0 i %.
- -- -- ------------------ - - - - -- e -
`� .. .• lower bound
..
w --- ..._..._------- - - - - -- - -- - - -' _... - - - -- - - -
1.11 ......... .... '� - - - - --
. .. - . , ... ..:.....
i
0.0 -, -- - -- - - r- -- --
cx NC' OH '%VA ALL
The results of this study provide scientifically based data that indicate that the installation of
digital on- premise signs does not lead to a statistically significant increase in crashes on maj4
roads. /
viii
CHAPTER 1:
INTRODUCTION
For many generations, most signs — including both traffic and business signs — were static.
They displayed only one message that did not change with time. Advances in information
display technologies in recent years have led to an increase in the use of many types of digital
signs, particularly in the area of on- premise and off - premise business signs. On- premise digital
signs provide the ability to communicate a wide variety of messages and to change the manner in
which the message is presented over time. As such, these digital signs.represent a significant
advancement in communication technologies and the ability to deliver valuable marketing
information to potential customers. However, some groups have raised questions related to the
traffic safety aspects of business signs that change messages on a frequent basis. The traffic
safety concerns are often related to issues of potential driver distraction from the roadway due to
the dynamic nature of these signs. These safety concerns are sometimes addressed through local
regulation of these types of signs, which may prohibit or limit the use of on- premise digital signs.
These regulations tend to be developed at the local level and do not have a significant level of
scientific, nationally based research supporting the regulations.
The traffic safety concerns associated with on- premise digital signs have existed for some time,
but there has been little research, particularly on a national level, that directly addresses the
safety impacts of on- premise digital signs. In part, this is due to the fact that the use of such signs
has grown only in the last 5 -10 years. The research described in this report was conducted to
provide a scientifically based, national analysis of on- premise digital signs so that the traffic
safety impacts of such signs can be better understood.
RESEARCH APPROACH
The basic research method used in this study is a before -after statistical analysis of the change in
traffic crashes at locations where digital signs were installed. The research team used digital sign
installation information provided by sign manufacturers to identify locations in selected states
where digital signs had been installed in the 2006 -2007 time frame (this time frame was selected
to provide adequate numbers of crashes in both the before and after periods). The analysis
locations were limited to California, North Carolina, Ohio, and Washington because these states
are part of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Highway Safety Information System
(HSIS). The HSIS is a database of crash records that includes detailed information about the
roadway and crashes, including such factors as the number of lanes, the speed limit, crash
severity, and other factors. The researchers then mapped the sign sites to the crash datasets to
identify locations with crashes. These locations were then analyzed to compare the crashes
before installation of the digital sign to the crashes after installation of the sign using statistical
analysis procedures.
DESCRIPTION OF A DIGITAL SIGN
For the purposes of this study, a digital sign is defined as a sign that uses an electrical display,
such as a liquid crystal display (LCD) or light- emitting diode (LED), to provide changeable
messages or graphics. There are several types of digital signs, including digital billboards, indoor
video advertisements, and street -level advertisements (such as LED signs on bus shelters). For
this study, the researchers focused only on on- premise digital signs, which are signs located on
the same property as the business with which they are associated. The research effort did not
include or address off - premise signs or billboards.
RESEARCH ACTIVITIES AND REPORT ORGANIZATION
There were five major activities associated with this research effort. The study began by
reviewing and evaluating previous research on the safety aspects of digital signs and the
statistical methods that other researchers have used to evaluate the safety aspects of signs.
Chapter 2 describes the results of the review of background information. The researchers then
began to collect information related to digital signs and crash data in the selected states. The sign
information included the location and date of installation, and the crash data included the
location and date. The researchers then devoted extensive effort to matching the locations and
dates of the signs and crash datasets. Chapter 3 describes the sign and crash data and how the
two datasets were merged together. Once this was accomplished, the next step was to develop a
valid and scientifically based statistical analysis procedure to determine if there were any
statistically significant changes in crashes after installation of digital signs. Chapter 4 describes
the development of a statistical methodology, including a comparison of the advantages of the
different options for conducting the statistical analysis. Finally, the research team used the results
of the statistical analysis to define the key study findings, which are described in Chapter 5.
Chapter 6 presents the conclusions and recommendations for the research study.
OA
Distributed at the 7
Meeting
UNIVERSITY OF
Cincinnati
The Economic Value of On- Premise Signage
S.AJy�•i�i.F4.' "�'
tl'r
4i..
M3'{ f„ i 1 t' qY` .v - ':�.n�il,,. 'i y,� ,,,'7'.lft -f•�r.;�, M^ 5�T „7 : -y- f, � S�Fn „��y., i., - {' klyPie.
Prepared for the Signage Foundation, Inc.
Prepared by the Economics Center, University of Cincinnati
August 2012
Principal Investigator
Jeff Rexhausen
Co- Investigator
Henry Hildebrandt
Co- Investigator
Christopher Auffrey, PhD
Research Economist
Jennifer Shand Pitzer, PhD
Research Economist
Benjamin Passty, PhD
August 2012
t
QP
��. signage {oundatioti, inc
Design, architecture' Ec®nomicSCenter
Art, and Planning
UNIVERSITY OF
Cincinnati
i"h�e � q m'�+�Ualk"i"e of Oa -f're �e 5'�3na e1I�
., U�mI1Y�onw��mlM lAt:���'.f1�WS�w� h1u4�rr� fik4 on ���di'�:"
University of Cincinnati
Businesses of all sizes and types use on- premise signs to communicate with their
customers. It has been suggested that on- premise signs and the regulations that
limit them can significantly impact the performance of some types of businesses, yet
there has been limited recent research to inform decisions about sign investment or
regulation.
To provide more current insight, researchers at the University of Cincinnati
conducted a national survey of businesses and a series of case studies. The purpose
was to assess how changes in on- premise signage affect business performance. This
report provides details about that research's approach and results. Business owners
responding to the national survey reported that additional and improved signs are
associated with increases in their revenues and profits. The case studies suggest that
signage visibility and conspicuousness are especially important, and that signage
plays an important role in a business'overall branding and marketing strategy.
This research indicates that appropriately designed and located on- premise signage
can be an important factor for retail business success. The implication of these
results is that on- premise signage indirectly influences the vitality of a community
and the quality of life of consumers by providing information about the availability
of goods and services.
Examination of one field of economic theory — search theory — and application
of this concept to the subject of signage presents a new explanation for why on-
premise signs have positive economic impacts, not only for businesses, but also for
consumers and communities: namely, signs make it easier for shoppers to obtain the
information they need to make a purchase.
A national survey asked businesses about sign changes and the impact of those
changes on business performance. In addition, detailed questions inquired
about the nature of the business and the use of signs. The survey produced some
significant findings regarding both economic impacts and sign preferences.
Sign changes generally had significant, positive impacts on sales, number of
transactions and profits. Roughly 60 percent of businesses reported
increases averaging about 10 percent.
• Sign changes also led to small positive impacts on employment. Nearly a
quarter of respondents reported hiring more people.
• While most single establishments and small firms have either wall signs or
pole signs, most large companies have both. In general, larger companies
tend to have more types of signs.
• Helping customers find their location was the most important purpose for
respondents. Legibility is the most important characteristic of signs across
all sizes of companies.
• Business logos and the size and location of the signs were more important
for companies with more establishments, for whom branding is presumably
more important, compared with single establishment companies.
Among the case studies, positive business performance was generally associated
with greater use of on- premise signage and better quality signs, as the following
results indicate.
The national lodging chain case study found that the use of a digital .�
electronic sign to dis la ricing was associated with increased average
occupancy rate . The impact app o e especially strong for properties
with lower occupancy rates.
• The national retail banking business case study found that pylon signs were
strongly associated with high visibility, monument signs were moderately
associated with high visibility, and wall signs contributed to identity but
not visibility. In addition, pylon signs were associated with significantly
more teller transactions.
• The specialty store small business case study demonstrated the need
for signage to reaffirm the value offered by a niche retailer. Sign design must
be sensitive to community and customer expectations, and able to reinforce
the brand of a small business. The signage should communicate
a "promise" of value for a product and /or service that is not commonly found
• ~ e car dealership small business case study found that the addition of
a video sign board was associated with increases in both service department
and customer traffic. n added enefit was the "goodwill"and
reputational gain associated with using the video board for community -
related public service messages.
Given the economic importance of signs, regulations should balance community
design objectives with full knowledge of how sign design and location impact
businesses success. Business success is important because of its impact on a
community's tax base, and it ultimately leads to the availability of greater fiscal
resources to provide needed community services.
'The-Economiaie of Qrtcprem {we51�rge,.
University of
Executive Summary
I. Introduction .................................. ..............................1
II. Context ....................................... ..............................5
A. The Problem ............................. ..............................5
B. Research Challenge ..................... ............................... 5
C. Previous Research ....................... ..............................6
D. Research Approach ...................... ..............................8
III. Economic Theory and On- Premise Signs .... ............................... 11
A. Origins of Search Theory ................ .............................12
B. Relevance of Search Theory to On- Premise Signage ..................13
IV. National Survey ............................... .............................17
A. Survey Approach ............................... .....................17
B. Survey Results ......................... ............................... 17
V. Case Studies .................................. .............................25
A. National Lodging Chain —Value Place . ............................... 25
B. National Retail Banking Business ....... .............................27
C. Specialty Store Small Business — Bob Roncker's Running Spot ....... 34
D. Car Dealership Small Business — Anderson Ford ...................... 39
VI. Summary of Research Findings .............. ............................... 43
VII. Conclusion ....... ............................... ..........................47
A. Implications for Businesses ............ ............................... 47
B. Implications for Communities ........... .............................48
C. Implications for Future Research ......... .............................48
Appendices............................................ .............................51
1. Survey Instruments .................... ............................... 51
2. Retail Banking Technical Appendix .... ............................... 57
References........................................... ............................... 61
Acknowledgements ................................... .............................65
v
T e Economi�/'�1�"e�o_:�pO�remi e Si�n�g
feamW6'arANS f`l.
•
Communication is perhaps the single most important activity for the success
of human societies (Richmond & McCroskey, 2009). Signs are among the most
important elements of visual communication. The visual communication provided
by signs on our streets and highways is essential for an effective transportation
system to aid in getting us where we want to go. Similarly, the visual communication
provided by on- premise business signage is essential for the efficient function of
our system of commerce and the success of many businesses. Effective signage can
drive job creation, generate tax revenues, and provide quality access to goods and
services.
Communities depend on clear, legible and conspicuous signs for direction, safety
and information. Businesses have a long established history of using signs to
announce their products and services. On- premise business signs are especially
important within the context of our highly mobile society where we frequently
venture to unfamiliar areas. On- premise signage allows a business to cost - effectively
communicate with potential customers who are moving through its trade area.
The wayfinding, identification and marketing information, provided by on-premise
signage is essential for assisting existing and potential customers in finding the
goods and services they seek.This connection between customers and businesses
is crucial for business success, and the local governments that depend on the
employment and tax revenues which businesses generate.
On- premise signs are a potentially powerful medium for commercial
communication. Frequently, on- premise signage is a key element, which is often
used with other media, to develop and maintain a business brand.The more
consistently that brand is communicated, the greater the likelihood that existing
and potential customers will associate it with specific expectations for price, product
brand, or service quality at specific locations.
On- premise signs that are designed well and properly located are especially
important for generating impulse sales. While some goods and services are primarily
purchased on the basis of careful consideration and forethought, many others are
impulse purchases. Indeed, impulse sales generate an important part of revenue
for a wide variety of retail businesses. One study (Conroy 2004) found 68 percent of
purchases during major shopping trips were unplanned, and 54 percent on smaller
shopping trips. In these cases, on- premise signage is critical.
This study provides current analysis of how on- premise signage is linked to
business success. A California study from the 1990s indicated that changes to
the number and location of on- premise signage can have a direct impact on
business performance (Ellis, Johnson & Murphy, 1997). That study— which used
statistical analysis of signage, business performance and location- specific data
for two business chains — found that an increase in the number of on- premise
signs at a particular site had a significant and positive impact on sales, number of
customer transactions,'and the amount of the average transaction. Case studies
also have been used extensively in the small business and signage trade literature
to document the impact of signage on the economic performance of businesses.
For example, the New York State Small Business Development Center (Conroy
2004) details a number of case studies. One case, based on the experience of a
car wash, documents the association of improved sign legibility and visibility with
higher sales, as well as suggesting that the introduction of message boards can lead
to increased sales. Another case, based on the experience of a small restaurant,
documents the association of improved sign visibility and conspicuousness with
increased sales. While these case studies do not provide conclusive evidence of the
economic value of on- premise signage, they do provide insight to specific causal
mechanisms that may be useful for interpreting the statistical analyses of the survey
data.
For decades, alancing the signage needs of individual businesses with the broader
concerns of communities has been a concern of local officials, the sign industry, and
planning and design professionals. Funding for essential local government services
such as police, fire, roads, and education often depend on the success of local
businesses. This linkage between on- premise signage, business success, and local
government revenues (and the public services they fund) highlights the need for
sign regulation process to be informed by research such as is being conducted here.
Signs regulations can and should promote designs that promote business success
while meeting appropriate local standards.
The impact of on- premise signage is dependent on visual elements that may
interact with and complement a business'marketing and branding strategies. Visual
characteristics and perceptual concepts related to signs, symbols, semiotics, and the
built environment have been addressed in Berger's Seeing is Believing (2007) and the
two groundbreaking treatises byTufte (Envisioning Information (1990) and Visual
Explanations (1997)). An appreciation for the layering of economic and marketing
roles together with a visual identity program becomes important for understanding
the contribution of on- premise signage within a comprehensive marketing strategy.
The research presented in this report provides an analysis of the economic effects
of signage within a context of varied scales and types of business. The objective
of the study is to provide an updated assessment of the impact of signage on
businesses and communities. Several earlier publications have identified key issues
and economic factors associated with on- premise signage, with "The Economic
Value of On- Premise Signage" "The Signage Sourcebook, and "What's Your Signage"
providing reference and guidance for much of the past two decades. Except for the
recent work of Taylor (2010;Taylor, Sarkees & Bang, 2012), the value of signage has
lacked recent rigorous analysis.
This study uses survey data and case studies to bring the economic impact of on-
premise signage into a clearer focus within prescribed theoretical frameworks and a
diversity of sign applications. Venturi and Brown in "Learning from Las Vegas" (1971)
analyzed the Las Vegas strip, its sign /buildings relationships, and their impact within
our urban / suburban environment. Their study systematically assessed the visual
impact of signs within a concentrated market area with ever - changing views from
the automobile. Venturi was the first to connect on- premise signage to commercial
symbols that contained economic value in their meanings beyond the direct
communication objective and architectural product. Berger,Tufte, and others have
provided additional understanding to advance the symbolic meanings contained in
signage and signs. It is within such a broader framework that this research utilizes
case studies in combination with economic data to bring the value of on- premise
signage into a clear focus. Case studies are used for illustrating the diverse sign
typologies and as an analytical interface with communities, brand identity, and the
"marketing functions "of signs (Taylor, 2010).