|
June 19, 2008
Sheryl Sculley, City Manager
City of San Antonio
P. O. Box 839966
San Antonio, TX 78283-3966
Dear Ms. Sculley:
Based on the proceedings at
the June 10, 2008 Electrical Supervisory Board, we are
concerned about the interpretation of the digital billboard
sections of the sign ordinance.
The issues revolve around
what is considered “minimal modification” and what is
considered “significant modification” of existing erected
billboards. These definitions are important. From the
photographs it appears that the digital signs are entirely
new signs erected on existing sign poles. The old sign
boards are removed from the existing pole and a new digital
sign is hoisted up on the pole. This appears to be beyond
“minimal modification” and is instead “significant
modification.”
The definition of
“significant modification” and “minimal modification” are
important in controlling the location of new digital signs
and the removal of existing billboards.
For instance, the sign code
provides that a digital sign can be located in Corridors
(historic and scenic corridors) only if “minimal
modification” is made to the existing sign. If dismantling
the existing sign board and hoisting a new digital sign is
more than minimal modification, then no digital signs can be
located in the corridors. Six of the new digital signs are
scheduled for corridors.
Likewise, the sign ordinance
defines a “new sign” as one placed at a location now devoid
of signs or one placed at the location of an existing
erected sign if the existing erected sign structure requires
“significant modification” to support the new digital sign.
A “new sign” requires that two existing billboard locations
be removed. This is in addition to the conversion rations
set forth for digital billboards. Therefore, if an existing
erected sign structure requires “significant modification”
then it is considered a new sign, which requires, in
addition to the conversion ratio, two other billboards to be
removed.
The definition of
“significant modification” will also have an impact as to
the modifications that can be made to non-digital
billboards.
The staff memo included in
the reports raises questions about how the new digital
billboards are proceeding. This is an area that needs to be
closely watched. We will be submitting a freedom of
information act request to the Electrical Supervisory Board
requesting copies of the applications for permits for the
digital signs and all information supplied with the
applications for permits.
We do not believe it is
prudent for any permits to be granted for digital billboards
until:
- A complete list of signs
to be taken down, and their locations, is presented.
Photographs documenting the condition of the signs
should be available as well.
- A resolution to the
issue of the use of the terms “minimal modification” and
“significant modification” is approved by the Electrical
Supervisory Board. No billboards requiring “significant
modification” should be allowed in a scenic or urban
corridor.
- A methodology is
presented to City Council to monitor the traffic safety
issue prior to the installation of any signs – including
pre-digital sign erection measures and measures after
the signs are erected.
If San Antonio is to allow 15
digital billboards, they should only be allowed as city code
and council procedures have provided.
Thank you for your consideration of our comments.
Sincerely,
Marcie Ince
President
C: Mayor Phil Hardberger and
Members, San Antonio City Council
Rod Sanchez, Director, Development Services, City of San
Antonio
December 6, 2007
STATEMENT
To: The Hon. Phil
Hardberger and Members,
San Antonio City Council
Re: Item No. 5 – An
Ordinance amending Chapter 28 of the City Code of San
Antonio, Texas, by adding provisions for digital signs;
clarifying, consolidating and adding various definitions;
repealing the amortization plan for non-conforming signs;
and providing for penalties and publication.
Mayor and City Council, my
name is Marcie Ince and I serve as the President of the San
Antonio Conservation Society. The action item before you
today is an opportunity to send a clear message to the
citizens of San Antonio and the world that San Antonio is a
city that cherishes and promotes its authenticity. Our
history, our culture and our environment is worthy of
preservation and protection. Believe me, our local people
and visitors would not agree that digital billboards will
enhance our authenticity. And if they do not enhance our
quality of life, why should we allow them here? The decision
is yours.
The sad reality is that
Scenic and Urban Corridors, created by former City Councils,
will be gutted if you pass this ordinance today. All of the
non-conforming signs in these corridors may be eligible for
new digital sign faces. The corridors are some of our most
visible, and by no coincidence, most profitable, highways in
the city – Highway 281 from the airport to downtown,
sections of I-10 between the loops and all of l604. Our
previous leaders listened to the community and successfully
identified and designated our Scenic and Urban Corridors for
protection. And now you are considering allowing ONE company
to take these protected corridors away.
Finally, permitting a one
year “pilot program” allowing 15 digital billboards to be
erected in a city as sprawling as San Antonio may not seem
like many signs. Think with me of the most impressive vistas
you see of our skyline as you approach the city from almost
any direction. I don’t know about you, but I get goose bumps
when I get that first glimpse of the Tower of Americas and
the sweeping panorama of the city. It may be driving up from
the coast on I-37, or coming in from Castroville on Highway
90, or reaching that last hill driving down from the Hill
Country on Highway 281. These are special places in our
landscape that are ironically the ideal locations for
digital billboards. Please do not allow gaudy monster signs
to clutter our skyline. At what point do we stop kidding
ourselves about being considered one of the four most unique
cities in America. With all of these billboards, we will
look just like everyone else. Please do not rob us of our
right to a beautiful city.
The decision is yours.
Marcie Ince
President
November 28, 2007
STATEMENT
To: Sheila McNeil,
Chair, and Members,
Infrastructure & Growth Council Committee
Re: Consideration of
staff’s recommendation regarding revisions to Chapter 28 of
the City Code to regulate the use of digital billboards
As the issue of digital
billboards receives perhaps its final hearing by your
committee, the San Antonio Conservation Society is concerned
about a potential compromise resulting in a possible 40%
reduction in billboards as a result of allowing Clear
Channel to erect digital boards.
We do not need to compromise
on what happens to our publicly funded highways. We need a
strong Mayor and City Council to pass a “No New Billboards”
ordinance. Under strong leadership, Houston has reduced its
billboards from 10,000 in 1980 to less than 4,500 today.
Dallas, Fort Worth and about 350 other Texas cities have
developed similar plans. Texas and federal courts have held
that Texas cities may prohibit billboards.
Digital technology should not
be allowed on non-conforming signs. Adding a new electronic
message center to an existing vinyl face billboard is a
“major modification” that should be expressly prohibited.
It is criminal to allow the
sign industry to be able to reuse existing nonconforming
grandfathered signs that were destined for removal after
they out live their useful life. Historic districts, scenic
corridors, such as Loop 1604, were deemed unacceptable for
billboards in the past. Why permit them now? The single
purpose of digital technology is to get the motorist’s
attention. These distractions are downright hazardous.
One final observation is that
as we make our rounds visiting with City Council members and
staff, we have observed that there are a lot of unanswered
questions. Why not vote to send this item to an appropriate
city commission with jurisdiction over citywide growth and
development, such as the Planning Commission?
Marcie Ince
President
October 17, 2007
STATEMENT
To: Sheila McNeil,
Chair, and Members,
Infrastructure & Growth Council Committee
Re: Consideration of
staff’s recommendation regarding revisions to Chapter 28 of
the City Code to regulate the use of digital billboards
The San Antonio Conservation
Society continues to be concerned about proposed changes to
the Sign Ordinance allowing Digital Billboards. We do not
concur with the watering down of the recommendations made by
the Electrical Supervisory Board’s signage committee
announced at your previous meeting on October 9, 2007.
Before addressing the
specific concerns about the ordinance, we need to express
our belief that the citizens of San Antonio deserve
billboard free scenic corridors. Our current ordinance is an
anomaly in a state in which approximately 310 communities
have effectively banned new billboard construction. Citizens
of Dallas, Houston, Fort Stockton and McAllen are some that
can enjoy billboard free highways. San Antonio is unique in
Texas because we are the only major city to have an
ordinance which requires taking billboards down to put up
one new billboard. We should not pretend in a city with 1544
billboards that there will be any serious reduction of
billboards in San Antonio as long as we permit new billboard
construction. The argument that the proposed ordinance is a
step in minimizing the number of billboards does not take
into account the huge impact that just one digital billboard
has on the streetscape. They are many times more
attention-getting than conventional signage—that is why they
are so profitable for the sign industry and that is why
allowing them is a step in the wrong direction. In a city
with the state’s most visited tourist destinations, why
would we want to open the door to a technology that will
detract from our authenticity?
The latest draft of the
ordinance reverses several of the signage committee’s most
important recommendations:
- Digital technology
should not be allowed on non-conforming signs. Adding a
new electronic message center to an existing vinyl face
billboard is a “major modification” that should be
expressly prohibited. A syndicated column by Neal Peirce
revealed that electronic billboards “consume 4,800 watts
of electrical power per square yard per hour.”
- Capping the number of
digital billboards at 10 in the first year was a valid
concept. It is new technology vastly different from
existing signage and the city should be allowed the
opportunity to evaluate the performance and public
feedback.
A stated purpose of our sign
ordinance is to protect the safety of our transportation
network. We continue to be concerned that there is no
unbiased study illustrating that digital billboards are not
safety hazards. We repeat our earlier comments that San
Antonio should have a moratorium on digital billboards until
the study by the Federal Highway Administration is released
in 2009.
In addition to safety,
another stated purpose of the sign ordinance is aesthetics.
Any changes to Chapter 28 of the City Code of Ordinances
should “preserve, protect and enhance:” aesthetic and
economic property/values; the attractiveness of the city;
the impression of the city to citizens and visitors; and
most importantly, San Antonio’s quality of life.
We ask, how will a
proliferation of digital billboards allow the achievement of
safety and aesthetics?
Marcie Ince
President
September 11, 2007
STATEMENT
To: Paul Davila,
Chairman, and Members,
Electrical Supervisory Board
Sign Ordinance Committee
Re: Public Hearing
concerning draft “E” of Proposed Amendments to Chapter 28 of
the City Code dealing with Off-Premise Digital Signs
The San Antonio Conservation
Society continues to have serious concerns about the
proposed changes to the sign ordinance regarding digital
billboards.
We do not find that all of
the statements made by the sign industry are adequately
supported. Regarding safety, the proposed rules would allow
a new message every 6 seconds. That is a significant driver
distraction, particularly since these lights are the
brightest objects in the landscape. A study has shown that
anything that distracts a driver from looking straight ahead
at the road for more than 2 seconds increases the chances of
crashes or near crashes. The Federal Highway Administration
has a safety study underway which will give unbiased
results. It will not be available until 2008. Why not wait?
The safety of our citizens should be our major concern.
Takedown rules in Texas can
cause major financial hardship to local taxpayers. Because
of pro-industry state legislation in 1972, local governments
are required to pay cash to the sign company if a highway is
widened and a billboard needs to be relocated or condemned.
If digital billboards are allowed, payment to the billboard
company is many times greater for digital billboards because
they are so expensive to construct. The cost is up to
$500,000 per billboard. Instead of a four for one takedown,
we should be asking for an eight or ten takedown for one new
sign.
Across the country, citizens
have become increasingly aware of the negative impacts of
lighting which affect the night sky. Illuminated and
flashing billboards are now a major consideration. In San
Antonio, think of the recent testimony of representatives of
Camp Bullis and their concerns about zoning which would
allow light pollution to impair the ability for troops in
training to perform nighttime operations. What would the
Army say about brilliantly illuminated signs flashing every
6 to 8 seconds?
Another major concern is that
the proposed rules allow for conversion of any existing
billboard into a digital billboard. Existing signs that do
not meet the current sign code are grandfathered, meaning
that they may stay in place until they wear out and then
cannot be replaced. This digital billboard proposal allows
the existing grandfathered signs to be reconfigured as
digital billboards. San Antonio prides itself as a special
place of diverse culture, beauty, charm and history. We are
the most visited city in Texas. San Antonio has done very
well without the glitz of other places. The in-your-face
signage of Times Square and Las Vegas is simply not San
Antonio. It can only serve to diminish the perceived
character and charm that we and our guests treasure. Think
of the impact of huge, brilliantly illuminated rapidly
changing images on 281 heading into downtown or the views
traveling out to Sea World on 151. It is not a pretty
picture.
The public should not have
this new technology forced upon them without more
consideration. We should wait, study the success and
failures of the existing billboard rules and place a
moratorium on construction of any new billboards. Only then
can we take an unbiased look at the realities of placing
these environmentally unfriendly and hugely profitable signs
on our streets and highways. They are unsafe and unsightly.
Marcie Ince
President
|
