1996-21 RESOLUTION NO. 96-21
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE,CALIFORNIA REGARDING BILLBOARD SIGNS ALONG
FREEWAY I-215 AND I-10
WHEREAS,the recently installed billboards are intrusive to most drivers and area residents; and
WHEREAS, it is very difficult to reverse billboard approval action and related contracts due to
cost of reimbursement of potential billboard proceeds over time; and
WHEREAS,regional actions have been taken as follows:
1. The I-10 Beautification Authority issued a six-month moratorium for billboards along I-
10. "This ban"may affect at least five new Adams signs and seven Oakridge signs per
an article in The Sun on September 4, 1996(Attachment Q
2. Cal Trans District 8 initiated a legislative proposal to prohibit placement of billboards
within freeway interchanges or within 100' of the travel way of any freeway or state
highway.
3. SANBAG,at its Board Meeting of September 4, 1996,voted to suspend TMEE or
federal TEA and other specific funds(i.e.the I-104-215 interchange improvement
funds),as a discouragement measure for cities whose actions are detrimental to regional
coordination efforts to beautify freeway corridors. SANBAG voted also to support the
six-month billboard moratorium and Cal Trans District 8 initiative.
WHEREAS, advertisement boycotts by residents and other actions by cities affected are and will
continue to be fundamental to cause the development of appropriate laws and policies to regulate
billboards in the future; and
WHEREAS,pursuant to the City of Grand Terrace Planning Commission,the billboard
signs recently installed are not consistent with the City General Plan and with our Zoning Code;
and
WHEREAS,pursuant to the City General Plan:
"Scenic resources should be protected from harmful impacts and maintained
as community assets". (General Plan Aesthetic Resources,V-8); and
"The City will establish a formal liaison with adjacent jurisdictions; i.e.Riverside and
San Bernardino Counties and the City of San Bernardino and Colton for the purpose of
evaluating the effects of each jurisdiction land use planning activities on contiguous
areas(General Plan Land Use Policies,VI-4)"; and
WHEREAS,pursuant to the City's Site and Architectural Review criteria the Planning
Commission is empowered to:
• "Ensure that the location and configuration of structures are visually harmonious with
their sites and surrounding sites and structures,that they do not interfere with neighbors'
privacy that they do not unnecessarily block scenic views from other structures and/or
public areas,and be in scale with the townscape and natural landscape of the area;
• Ensure that the architectural design of structures and their materials and colors are
visually harmonious with surrounding development,natural landforms, is functional for
the proposed project and is consistent with this title;
• Ensure the preservation of the natural beauty of the city and its setting,to prevent the
indiscriminate clearing of property,the destruction of trees and natural vegetation and
the excessive and unsightly grading of hillsides,and to preserve the natural landforms;
• Ensure that the design and location of signs are consistent with the scale and character of
the building to which they are attached or otherwise associated with and are consistent
with this title."
VWIIEREAS,pursuant to the City sign code,sign regulations shall be designed to:
• "Provide a reasonable system of controls for signs and the development of a high quality
visual environment.
• Encourage signs which are well designed and pleasing in appearance and to provide
incentive and latitude for uniformity of signs in commercial and industrial
developments,good design relationship in scale and spacing.
• Encourage a desirable urban character free of overhead clutter.
• Enhance the economic value of the community and each area thereof through the
regulation of such things as size,number, location, design and illumination of signs.
• Encourage signs which are compatible with adjacent land uses.
• Reduce possible traffic hazards through good signing. ..
• Protect the general health, safety and public welfare."
WHEREAS,billboard/off site signs are prohibited within the City of Grand Terrace. Parcels
adjacent to the freeway are allowed one freeway sign per lot,not to exceed 75 square feet to advertise
goods and services provided on site only. Currently installed billboards and others already approved
vary from 800 to 1200 square feet.
WHEREAS,the recently installed billboard signs are not in conformance with most
common architectural and sign review criteria; and
VaMREAS,the billboards are too large and out of scale. They are out of scale with:
• the Caltrans signs on the freeway
• the freeway structure itself
• the cars
• the surrounding fabric of the built environment
2
WHEREAS,the billboard signs are too close to the freeway,to the cars and the commuters. The
billboard signs are too high,unnecessarily high. There is an over-concentration of billboard signs in the
I-215/I-10 interchange area, and there will be more signs and ensuing over-concentration of signs along
the entire length of the 1-215 from the county line to the I-10. According to the Sun Newspaper there are
42 more billboard permits pending to go up on county roads; and
WHEREAS,the overwhelming visibility of the billboards will likely supersede the visibility of
the Caltrans freeway signs. This may cause drivers to read the billboard signs first instead of the
directions on lanes and interchange information;this proximity thereby causing visual confusion and
accidents. The signs are so close that in the event of an earthquake, it is perceived they will be a safety
threat tho the drivers and to the freeway structure itself; and
WHEREAS,the billboards are unsightly and obstruct the view of the mountains. They create a
stigma of visual blight; and
WHEREAS,the billboard signs give our freeways a typical highway look found in any highway
in the state. It eliminates any efforts to create community identity. It does not add class,value or convey
the uniqueness of the area. The billboards are detrimental to the image of the City and the region. The
City of Grand Terrace code strives for discrete presence and attractiveness much similar to the sign codes
of Santa Barbara,Pasadena, Claremont and Beverly Hills. The City's goal is not to promote a Las Vegas
sign environment;and
WHEREAS,the San Bernardino Association of Governments"(SANBAG)and its member
agencies have expended or programmed more than$6 million within the I-10 corridor beautification over
the past six years in an attempt to enhance the county's image for prospective businesses,residents and
tourists,as well as to enhance its aesthetic qualities"(SANBAG/staff report to the administrative.
committee,August 14, 1996); and
WHEREAS, approximately$2,900,000 out of the$6 million was allocated for billboard removal
with overall policy that the master plan shall establish policies to phase out and prohibit off-site
advertising(billboards)within the corridor. One of the purposes of this policy was to increase the
economic value and area capacity to draw businesses,home buyers,tourists and others to the district. It.
was found that economic activity will increase as a result of improved attractiveness of the corridor, a
corridor with few freeway signs and no off-site advertising signs. The County of San Bernardino and
City of Colton are members of the Corridor Beautification Authority which developed the master plan.
WHEREAS,the billboards ultimately will negatively affect economic development of the
region. Good companies, like Hewlett Packard,ESRI and others,would not like to move to a place with
a visual blight stigma. Obviously,to a business,location is everything-business needs to feel
comfortable,and even proud,of their location. The location should augment their efforts to market
themselves,rather then force the business to market themselves in spite of it.Visual blight causes a
negative multiplier effect on business in the long term.Finally,communities which care for the way they
look have proven to be more prosperous in sustaining economic growth; and
-� 3
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace
that:
The purpose of this resolution is to express the City of Grand Terrace goals and review criteria regarding
billboard signs as they affect our city and region as a whole. The resolution is to be utilized to support
regional action and to express our position as needed on a case by case basis.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the following action will be implemented:
Support regional efforts by:
A) Sending a copy of this resolution with cover memo to SANBAG via Council Member Jim
Singley reinstating the City support of their action; and/or
B) Sending a copy of this resolution with cover memo to the I-10 Corridor Beautification Authority
for the six-month moratorium stating support for regional action; and/or
C) Sending a copy of this resolution with cover memo to Cal Trans in support of new legislation
they have initiated to restrict billboards to 100'from freeways and other safety-related measures;
and/or
Request participation at the technical level on billboard signs' review by:
A) Sending a copy of this resolution with cover memo to the City Planning Commission and
Planning Department of Colton requesting that a more technical review with actual findings be
incorporated in the next billboard permits review process. Review to include,but not be limited
to: scale,proximity to freeway, over concentration,height, safety, long-term economic impacts,
CEQA compliance, and adjacent Cities General Plan goals. These are items under city purview,
not under regional or State agencies. Cities' regulations are the most discretionary,thus the most
powerful in terms of review of billboards; and/or
B) Sending a copy of this resolution with cover memo to the Planning Commission and Planning
Department of Colton requesting to be incorporated in the next billboard permit review as an
"affected agency".
ADOPTED this 12th day of September, 1996.
ATTEST:
City Clerk of the City df Grand Mayors fthe City of rand Terraq
Terrace and of the City Council and ct£the City Council thereof.
Thereof.
-- 4
I,Brenda Stanfill, City Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace,do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand
Terrace,held on the 12th day of September, 1996,by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Hilkey, Singley, and Garcia; Mayor Pro Tem Buchanan;
Mayor Matteson
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
City Clerk
Approved as to form:
JA 4n"
City Attorney
c:.../.../planning/cc/bilboard.res
5