Loading...
Memo/Ordinance for automatic Changing SignsMEMORANDUM DATE: February 17, 1989 TO Zoning & Planning Commission FROM: Nancy S. Anderson SUBJECT: Ordinance for Automatic Changing Signs Enclosed is the ordinance that would allow automatic changing signs in Hopkins. Please review and have any comments ready at the meeting. If this ordinance is acceptable, your action is to set a public hearing for the March meeting. Also enclosed are reports that deal with the safety issues of automatic changing signs. • 1 570.01 Subdiv. It Sign Automatic Changing Sign. A sign such as an electronically or electrically controlled public service time, temperature and date sign, message center or readerboard, where different copy changes are shown on the same lamp bank. Automatic changing signs such as public service time, temperature and date signs or electronically controlled message centers are classed as changing signs, not flashing signs. Subdiv. 11 Sign Wall. A sign attached to or erected against a wall of a building, with the face horizontally parallel to the building wall. Sign- Time /Temperature. An electronically controlled sign that is limited to the time and temperature. 570.51 Changing Signs. Changing signs are allowed in the B -3, and industrial zoning districts provided: a) that all changing signs are wall signs b) that all changing signs that face a residential district are located at least 500 feet from that district. c) any changeable sign will be included in the total allowable sign area. d) electronic messages maybe changed at periodic intervals by various entry and exit display modes provided that the maximum message time is 20 seconds with a 10 display frame per sequence. The message is limited to 3 per day not including time and temperature e) where changeable signs are proposed along a major arterial street or within 150 feet of a traffic signal light, the sign permit shall be reviewed by the Zoning Administrator and Director of Engineering to consider the proposed location, design and hold time. f) all changing signs shall be on premise. ��2 r m ko4ro� s 29.- aL rnC2S 570.52 2 Time /Temperature Sign. Time and temperature signs are allowed in the B -2 districts provided: a) that all time /temperature signs are wall signs. • 570.45 Height. The top of a sign, including its' superstructure, if any, shall be no higher than six feet above the roof of the building to which such sign may be attached or 35 feet above ground level whichever height is less; (except that the height of any name plate sign or changeable sign which is attached to or an integral part of a functional structure, °such as a water tower, smoke stack, radio or TV transmitting tower, or similar structure shall be no higher than such structure. Signs, including and superstructure standing or erected free of any building or other structure, shall not exceed an overall height of 35 feet from ground level and shall be located on land in an area which is landscaped, or if such land is part of an approved parking area, it shall be surfaced or paved as required in the zoning code. • • DORN LAW FIRM, LTD. 300 EAST MAIN STREET SUITE 200 ANOKA, MINNESOTA, 55303 TELEPHONE 1612; 427 -5903 al 6V r. DORN. JR. r. T EDWARDS - n v. SCHULTHEISS - CROSSTOWN SHOPPING CENTER MARK w. F AL2AHN 17565 CENTRAL AVENUE NE HAM LAKE, MINNESOTA 55304 TELEPHONE 1612!. - 5803 March 10, 1986 The Honorable Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission City of Elaine 9150 Central Avenue North Elaine, Minnesota 55434 Dear Planning Commission Members: HAM LAKE Following the Public Hearing which was held on February 20, 1986, concerning a new sign ordinance, I had the opportunity to review with my client and with American Sign and Indicator Corporation some additional data which we would ask be considered in your continuing review of the sign ordinance. Of particular concern is Section 34.07(A)(3) in which the new language would prohibit the changing of a message or any portion thereof on an electronic reader board sign with any more frequency than every fifteen minutes. (We had also been concerned that the reader board sign would be a nonconforming sign under Section 34.03 but we understand that this was due to a typographical omission and that reader board signs would not be nonconforming signs under the new ordinance.) The requirement that messages not be changed any more often than every fifteen minutes would essentially make reader board signs useless, and there would be no point in having them. The purpose of the reader board sign is to provide information to the public which can be changed at will, providing a variety of information ranging from public service announcements and time and temperature to advertising messages. Several planning commission members directed specific questions concerning the ordinance as it relates to reader board signs, upon which we wish to comment further. Many of the questions had been addressed in a rather comprehensive study done by Alan M. Voorhees and Associates, Inc., nationally recognized transportation urban planning consultants, in twc separate studies done for the State of New Jersey and for the town cf Framingham, Massachusetts, in conjunction with studies done for the American Sign and Indicator Corporation. These studies, performed in March of 197E and March of 1977,,tcok a scientific The Honorable Chairman and members of the Planning Commission City of Blaine Page Two March 10, 1986 approach to studying the safety features of reader board signs in these locations. It is believed, after review of these studies, that these apply with equal effect to the proposed and existing signs in Elaine, Minnesota, operated by Blaine Dodge, Inc. and by the Crosstown Bank. The studies, combined with their exhibits and tables, comprise over 100 pages of text and are too bulky to be reproduced in their - entirety. However, if any of the commission members wish to view a copy of the studies, we can make the studies available for your inspection. For the purposes of this correspondence, I will simply be referring to the Voorhees studies, and page numbers will be referenced to the studies performed for the State of New Jersey, since this was the most recent report. 1. Are there any statistics backing up claims that message center signs contribute to traffic accidents? It does not appear that message center signs have any more impact upon traffic accidents than any other type of sign or object. Quoting from the Summary of Findings of the Voorhees studies "in the opinion of the author, review of the proposed message indicators in relation to safety and traffic engineering implications revealed no significant impacts or safety hazards would be encountered ". (Voorhees study, Summary of Findings) . This finding was made based upon several existing signs located in the Boston area, and is amply supported by technical detail in the Voorhees study. In addition, American Sign and Indicator has from time to time been in contact with other local police departments and law enforcement officials concerning reader board signs, and has received no indication of any traffic hazards connected with any such signs. I enclose a sampling of a few of these comments, taken during an inventory approximately ten years ago. We have been furnished with no statistical information from the City of Elaine Police Department or from the City staff indicating that the Northtown sign location, or the Crosstown sign location which presently exist, have been causal factors in any decrease in traffic safety in these areas. City staff have indicated that they have received numerous "complaints" by ;slice officers as to the Northtown sign but have not pro `::ed any specifics of these "complaints ". I believe that any such complaints are probably isolated in nature, and no more significant than the number of accidents which are cased by people lighting cigarettes. The Honorable Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission City of Blaine Page Three March 10, 1986 2. Are there any statistics or standards in the industry indicating what reasonable time restrictions to place on messages? Before addressing this question, it is important to define just what a "messages is On a reader board sign, a message would consist of a totality of thoughts, appearing in sequence on the reader board. For example, as I pointed out at the Public Hearing, the Elaine City Hall Community Billboard on Highway 65 carried the following message, spread out over four lines: BL -SLP YOUTH BASEBALL REG HERE FEB 26 6:30 - 8:30 P.M. On the reader board signs for the clients I represent, the entire message above could not be placed at one time on the reader board. It would likely appear in four separate thoughts just as the Community billboard is divided into four lines. Each thought would be displayed on the reader board screen for a period of time, to be followed by the next remaining thoughts, comprising the message. Obviously, to have each of these separate thoughts appearing for fifteen minutes would accomplish nothing at all. The question then becomes one of how best to communicate the above message, which is considered a typical public service message, in a manner in which a passing motorist could receive the message without jeopardizing traffic safety. The Voorhees study specifically addresses this question and makes specific recommendations as to timing. A. Readability. The Voorhees study (page 35) indicates that letters of the sign contemplated by our signs first become legible at a distance of 1,200 feet, and, when grouped into words, become legible and readable at a distance of 1,000 feet. E. Time to Recognize a Thought. The Voorhees study (page 39) further indicates that it takes approximately one second for a person of average acuity and intelligence to "read" a thought consisting of four words spread across a reader board sign. In other words, when observing four words in sequence, the human mind does not consciously • The Honorable Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission City of Blaine Page Four March 10, 1986 C. Eyes Off Road. The Voorhees study points out a very important factor known as the cone of vision. For the vast majority of the time durinc which one is approaching a roadside sign, the sign and the entire amount of activity on the road ahead are all within the average person's "cone of vision ", and the eyes are really never off the road To quote the Voorhees study at page 55: "Again, it should be remembered that when driver attention is cn the indicator, a vision cone still includes the roadway immediately in front of the Vehicle due to the cone requirements and the selective attention process of the eye. Any unusual stimulus, such a breaklight, vehicle intrusion, etc., would be noticed and reacted to accordingly." D Reasonable Time for Messages. The Voorhees study, from the above analysis, recommends that each individual thought be displayed for a maximum of three seconds, with a maximum of four thoughts per message. (Voorhees study, page 55). The reasoning behind this logic is actually quite simple. A motor vehicle traveling at a speed of 55 m.p.h. traverses approximately 81 feet per second. A message indicator would first be legible from a distance of 1,000 feet. Therefore, under the most extreme of conditions, to -wit, a driver traveling 55 m.p.h. for the entire duration cf the time in which the message is legible, a total of twelve seconds would elapse from the time the message first becomes visible until the message is no longer in the driver's vision range. This would accommodate four separate thoughts displayed for three seconds each, or a four - thought message, involving the driver's attention being "off the road" for a total of our seconds, or _ considered to be reasonable by the Voorhees study (Voorhees study, pace 55). It should also be pointed out t:.a _ the average speed on Trunk Highway 65 is less than 55 m.p.h., due to _r.terv_en_ng stoplights traffic conditions, and the like. decipher and analyze every letter, but recognizes the thought almost instantaneously. For example, the four - word phrase, "Reg Here Feb. 26 ", which would comprise one of the lines on the Blaine Billboard, is a thought which is almost instantaneously recognized by the average reader, and, according to the Voorhees study, a timeframe of one second to observe and record this thought is considered reasonable. • • The Honorable Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission City of Blaine Page Five March 10, 1986 Summary. The above technical studies clearly demonstrate that the usage of reader board signs are not unsafe, and do provide some standards which can be followed. However, these standards are probably more beneficial for consideration by the owner of the signs than for insertion in an ordinance. We would suggest that the section of the ordinance dealing with the frequency of change of display be totally eliminated, and that the frequency of change of messages be left to the sound discretion of the owner of the sign. Obviously, it would make little sense for the owner of a sign to be displaying messages too rapidly for people to read them or too slowly for them to be of any use. On the other hand, if the City of Blaine does wish to encumber its ordinance with detailed specifics, it is suggested that the Voorhees study, which is the only scientific study that I know of in existence, be followed in terms of the parameters it sets, to -wit,, a display of four "thoughts" per message, displayed at intervals of three seconds each, and up to four thoughts per message. Obviously, this would require expanding the ordinance to define just what a message and what a thought is, and 1 truly believe that the industry would do a far better job of policing itself than any ordinance could every do. My recommendation would be that proposed Section 34.07(3)(bb) simply be deleted in its entirety. Please let us -know if we can be of any further assistance. Resppctful ly,yours , Wilbur F. Dorn, Jr. dm encl. APPENDIX . Copies of correspondence from police departments of West St. Paul and Shakopee, Engineering Department of the City of Minneapolis. 2. Cover sheets and selected pages from Voorhees Study. JACK MOHRLAND, upon being duly sworn, on oath says and a 1. He is a Lieutenant with the West St. Paul Police and his current position is Uniformed Division Commander. 2. He has been with the West St. Paul Police for the past sixteen (16) years. 3. His duties include the daily review of accident reports. 4. He is familiar with the Menard Lumber Company sign located along Robert Street south of Emerson Avenue. 5. Robert Street is one of the busiest streets in the State. 6. The sign utilizes a message center which carries different messages at various times, including commercial advertising, time, temperature and similar items. 7. The sign was installed in the early part of December, 1974. 8. When the permit for installation of the sign was sought, there was concern by city officials that it would cause car accidents. However, the sign was permitted on condition that it not contribute to car accidents. 9. Since the sign was installed, there have been no reports of car accidents caused by the sign. On the contrary, there have been favorable comments on the sign when public interest informa- sic:. is shown, such as the Viking football scores. S::b s c_ _bed and sworn to before me -7/PT av of January, 19J 5. -8- /; Jack Mohrland I) 4' 7 j tt • 53379 . G. G.,) n CMIEF Mr. Mark Ohnstad W -17.61 1st National Bank Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Dear Mr. Ohnstad: With reference to our telephone conversation of February 27th in checking the accident reports for the past two years we find that of the accidents that - occurred on Holmes Street in the area of the 1st National Bank of Shakopee, the time, temp- erature and message sign located on the building has not been a contributing factor to any accident: RUT .::lc f r vL1 torrit1i lYL s.1V'1 , 129 IEVEE DRIVE SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379 TEL NS4M February 28, 1975 r Yours very truly R. G. Thielen Chief of Police DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CLAYTON A. SORENSON. P.E. rrTy ENGINEER - DIRECTOR EAPOLIS. MINNESOTA SUES • L A.. BABCOCK W. F. EWS M. L ENQJIST J. r. NAYEK D. R. KOSKI L E LiLONDE W. G. RIDGE T. 6. SADLER P. D. SM:TN DIRECTOR, GEN. SERVICES - MANAGER. FINANCE -DIRECTOR, STREETS & SAN. - DIRECTOR. WATER WORKS -DIRECTOR. TRAFFIC ENGRG. -DIRECTOR, ADMINISTRATION --DIRECTOR. OPERATIONS - SUPERINTENDENT. EQUIPMENT - DIRECTOR, ENGRG. DESIGN March 19, 1975 Mr. Mark Ohnstad First National Bank West 1781 St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Re: Accidents at Humboldt and W. Lake St. Dear Mr. Ohnstad: I am info cifi dent sign and Sincerely, Thomas F. Becker Traffic Engineer II Av. S. mfflpalui day off 0� writing in regard to your telephone request for rination near the 5th National Bank, 1455 W. Lake cally, you were interested in information about s that may have been caused by the bank's variab adjacent to the auto drive -in facility at Humbo W. Lake St. I have checked our accident report file and find that since August of 1974 when this sign structure was originally installed, our records show no accidents directly caused by the variable message sign. This does not constitute an opinion evaluating the sign as being good or bad; just a statement of fact. I hope this is sufficient for your needs. accident St. Spe- any acci- le message ldt Av. S. A SAFETY EVALUATION OF THE TURF INN VARIABLE MESSAGE SIGN Colonie, New York September, 1981 (MDS( " MURRAY D. SEGAL El TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANT , L OtNOUIH ROAD 7 rrurray d sego) • tronspor cation Consultant 55 atronauln road Cnestrut hill. massacnusetts 02167 gg • 7 -423- ay. Mr. John M. Cholakis Tabner, Carlson, Farrell and Cholakis 90 State Street Albany, New York 12207 Dear Mr. Cholakis: The attached report summarizes my work on the Turf Inn variable message advertising sign. The study, undertaken at your request, presents the results of my August 1981 observations of the sign in operation, to study of accident records for Wolf Road and my previous experience with this type of sign. I look forward to presenting this material to the Colonie Zoning Board on September 8th. Respectfully submitted, Murray D. legal Transportation Consultant September 2, 1981 • SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS . In general, there is no data or studies known to the consultant which show that advertising signs are hazardous or a significant cause of motor vehicle collisions. A "before and after" accident study of that portion of Wolf Road within viewing distance of the Turf Inn variable message advertising sign indicates no increase in accidents in the first eight months of sign operation. 3. Prior studies of variable message signs by this consultant arid others have shown accident reductions on adjacent streets and roads. 4. A survey of ten major automobile insurance companies has revealed that none of the companies had ever received a claim as a result of any advertising sign. 5 The Turf Inn variable message sign is neither physically, structurally nor functionally similar to a rotating beacon, waving pennant or whirling device as prohibited in Section 8 -C -4 of the Colonie Zoning Law. 6. The Turf Inn variable message sign does not obstruct or interfere with the visibility of any official traffic control device. 7. Although traffic volumes on Wolf Road are moderate to heavy, the physical environment is not complex and the driving task at this location is not unduly taxing to the motorist. In addition, the great majority of the motorists are commuters who use the street frequently and are thus familiar with the street, the traffic patterns and the roadside activity. 8. The placement of the Turf Inn sign 3.3 feet closer to the property line than specified in the zoning law (15 feet) has no effect on the operation of the sign from a traffic safety viewpoint. In its present location the sign support is thirty nine (39) feet from the curb and this set back exceeds the nationally promoted "clear zone" standards recommended for high speed rural roads (30 feet). 9. It is the consultant's opinion that the Turf Inn sign a) Is not prohibited by section 8 -C -4 of the zoning law. b) Does not constitute a hazard of any kind to the motorists on Wolf Road or the Turf Inn access driveway. INTRODUCTION Study Purpose This study, undertaken at the request of attorney John Cholakis, is a safety evaluation of the large, variable message, on- premises, advertising. sign located at the Turf Inn on Wolf Road in Colonie, New York. The primary objective of this work has been to determine if this sign represents a hazard to the motoring public on Wolf Road. The evaluation of this sign with respect to the requirements of the Colonie zoning law was•a secondary objective. Study Methodology The work described in this report was conducted in August and September of 1981 and can be outlined as follows: 1) Inventory and observations at the Turf Inn site 2) Assembly of traffic data 3) Assembly of accident records date 4) data analysis 5) report preparation The consultant spent two days in Colonie during August of 1981. During this period the consultant made daytime and nighttime observations of the Turf Inn sign in operation, collected plans of the sign and the adjacent roadways, inventoried the nearby traffic control devices and searched the accident records of the town's police department. Subsequent to the collection of this field information, the consultant summarized and analyzed this data as a means of evaluating what, if any impact the sign has had or will have upon the safety of the motorists using Wolf Road. A review of other studies done by this consultant and others was performed and the results of all of the work were organized into this final project report. The Turf Inn Sign The sign which is the focus of this study was put into operation on the premises of the Turf Inn late in November of 1980. The Turf Inn is located on Wolf Road in Colonie New York. Wolf Road is a major at- grade - arterial street which carries approximately 30,000 vehicles per day in its 4 travel lanes (plus 1 left turn lane). The sign is situated in the center of a sixty four foot wide fenced and landscaped strip which divides the inbound and outbound driveways to the Turf Inn. The Inn itself is set far back from Wolf Road and is not easily visible except from a relatively short distance in the iW mediate vicinity of the access drive - Wolf Road intersection. The Inn is accessible from Interstate Route 1 -87 via ramps to Wolf and Albany - Shaker Roads 1000 -1600 feet to the North> Neither the Inn itself or the variable message sign is visible from the Interstate. Likewise, the sign is not visible from any of the public ways which intersect Wolf Road. The Turf Inn is a modern motel with indoor and outdoor swimming pools, and a variety of eating and lounge facilities. The Turf Inn sign has a display configuration of approximately 60 square feet (3 x 20) and utilizes a small computer console to control the display of messages. The display consists of a matrix of incandescent lamps which results in 24 inch high letters or symbols. The central console is located in the Turf Inn offices and provides the flexibility of storing a number of messages and displaying the in stationary or "running" modes. • • As noted, the sign has been in operation since late in November of 1980 and during this period the motel manager has received no complaints from the motel guests or residents of the area with regard to its operation. The sign has been used to announce special on -site functions (Banquets, etc.), to welcome convention groups, to advertise entertainment features and to inform passing motorists when room vacancies exist. Public service announcements are part of the planned use of the sign but time and temperature displays, a common use of this sign type, have not been incorporated into its program. The sign is in use 24 hours per day and the message programming has been informal rather than rigidly scheduled. The consultant has photographed (35 mm slides) the sign and its Wolf Road approaches but these photographs are not included in this report. • • SAFETY EVALUATION Accident Study The most direct means for evaluating the effect of the Turf Inn sign upon traffic safety is a study of the accident records for its area of influence. This study was conducted by the consultant during August of 1981 and utilized the accident records file of the Colonie Police Department. Because the records are not filed by location it was necessary to scan all of the accident reports (legally reportable) and identify those which occurred within the viewing range of the sign. A "before and after" study technique was followed as a way of determining if the installation of the sign had caused a change in the accident frequency. The "after" period ran from the sign installation (December 1, 1980) through the end of the month prior to the study (July 1981) and covered eight months. During this period over 7 million vehicles passed by the sign on Wolf Road. The record for this eight month period was then compared with the accident experience for the same 8 month period the prior year (i.e. December 1979 through July 1980). There were two reportable accidents in the "before" (i.e. before the installation of the sign). One of these involved, a sideswipe collision at the access drive intersection and the other involved a moving and a parked car in the Turf Inn parking lot. There was only one reportable accident in the "after" (i.e. after the installation of he sign) and this involved two vehicles, one making a left turn somewhere between Ulinski Drive and the Turf Inn Driveway. This direct comparison shows that the installation of the variable message sign at the Turf Inn has not caused any increase in the accident experience - to date. • • The results at the sign location are very consistent with the accident experience at the locations of other comparable sign installations. Some of these are briefly discussed in the following paragraphs. This consultant has recently completed an accident study in North Conway, New Hampshire at the site of a bank owned, on premises, variable message sign. This sign had been in operation for 9 months at a busy intersection in this small resort (summer and winter) community. Approximately 3.9 million vehicles passed through the intersection in the 9 months of operation. A before and after comparison showed a reduction in the accident rate of 61 percent after the sign was installed. During the conduct of this particular study, the consultant contacted the traffic engineers in Waltham and Cambridge Massachusetts with inquiries concerning their experience with large variable message signs installed at busy locations in these two communities. Both reported that there had been no reported instances where accidents had been related to the operation of the signs. Neither engineer was aware of any overall change in the accident frequency after the signs were installed. In 1974, The Massachusetts Department of Public Works studied the effects of a large variable message sign installed alongside the Southeast Expressway in Boston. This sign was located close to the exit from the Dewey Square Tunnel and close to expressway ramps. Speeds during off peak hours tended to be high and about 62,000 vehicles per day passed the sign in the south -bound direction. The sign was located directly at the .property line adjacent to the roadway viaduct which carried 3 lanes of traffic with no breakdown lane or shoulder. There were forty six (46) accidents in the year prior to the sign installation and fourteen (14) accidents in the year after the sign installation - a reduction of seventy percent (707). None of the collisions studied were caused by the sign. A 1977 study conducted for the town of Framingham Massachusetts by the Alan Voorhees consulting firm included a before and after accident comparison at the Sheraton Tara Hotel sign in that community. The sign is located on Massachusetts Route 9, a heavily travelled arterial highway. There were no accidents in the one year prior to the sign installation, and no accidents in the two years after the sign was installed. In the late 1960's and early 1970's this consultant assisted the Maine State Highway Commission in designing, constructing and utilizing a computerized accident records system. One of the many tasks completed by the consultant was the scanning and coding of every accident report occuring on the 4600 mile state highway system (urban and rural) over a three year period. Not a single one of the more than 32,000 accidents involved an advertising sign of any kind. The American Sign and Indicator Corporation recently surveyed ten leading automotive insurers in this country to ascertain their claims experience with advertising signs. Nine of the ten companies responded to the survey and all nine indicated that they had never received an accident claim involving an advertising sign. In summary, it seems clear that the evidence shows that advertising signs of any design have not been a significant cause of accidents either in a general sense or specifically with regard to the Turf Inn variable message sign. Traffic Control Devices Traffic engineers have, i n the past, been sensitive to the need to ensure that advertising signs do not physically interfere with the functioning of • • • official traffic control devices. For this reason many state and local jurisdictions regulate the use of flashing beacons as advertising devices. These beacons can be confused with similar beacons on emergency vehicles and represent sources of glare which can interfere with the ability of the motorist to see and recognize traffic signs, traffic signals, and other elements in the driving environment. The concern over these beacons arises more from their physiological impact - their effect on the ability to see and less from their potential psychological impact as a distraction from the driving task. The roadside is alive with such potential distractions and drivers tend to "filter" them out to the extent required by the demands of the driving task. The variable message sign has no physical or functional similarity to a flashing beacon. It presents a written and illuminated message to the driver rather than a simple light source (as with the beacon) and is free of glare. The small incandescent lamps in the sign matrix are on more or less continually and do not vary in intensity except for the ability to adjust the lighting level for daytime and nighttime viewing. Finally, there are no major traffic signs or signals within the viewing area of the Turf Inn sign and if there were, the 39 foot setback from the curb would certainly eliminate the possibility of the advertising sign physically interfering with their visibility. Section 8 -C -4 of the Colonie Zoning law prohibits "rotating beacons, waving pennants, or whirling devices." The variable message sign now located at the Turf Inn does not contain any rotating, waving or whirling elements and does not physically or functionally resemble any of the devices described in the law. • • • The Driving Task There has been concern expressed in the past that advertising signs in general and more specifically the large variable message signs are distractions to the motorist and thus represent an inherently hazardous device. Psychologically based analyses of the driving task tend to reduce this concern since they show that the driver tends to establish a hierarchy of elements in the driving task and "filter out" non - essential elements in the background environment as his need to focus on the complexities of the specific driving environment increases. Indeed, the traffic engineering profession has learned through long years of experience that traffic signs must be used judisciously (and sparingly) if the signs are to be effective. Even though this concern of "distraction" does not appear to be reflected by the accident experience or research in the field it may be helpful to examine the relative complexity of the specific driving task adjacent to the Turf Inn. Wolf Road has straight and level geometry within the viewing area of the Turf Inn sign and the alignment of the road itself does not appear to represent any unusual cr difficult control problems, Speeds during off peak hours appear to average around the 35 - 40 miles per hour range and thus are not unduly high. Traffic signals are located north of the Turf Inn at the 1 -87 ramp and at the Albany - Shaker Road intersection and this tends to limit speeds in the northbound direction. The only intersection (other than the Turf Inn Driveway) located within eye view of the sign is the_Ulinski Road intersection about 400 feet to the north. Traffic volumes entering and leaving Ulinski Road were observed to be very light and do not complicate the flow on Wolf Road to any significant degree. Traffic volume on Wolf Road is approximately 30,000 vehicles per day with substantial peaking during the afternoon commuting hours. Traffic flows smoothly in the Turf Inn vicinity and the 4 travel lanes appear to accomodate the flow at a reasonably good level of service. A central left turn lane is provided for left turns and these vehicles do encounter delays during peak hours. Accomodating left turns on a multi -lane street is typically a most difficult operational problem for the urban traffic engineer. A variety of solutions do exist and range from signalized and protected left turn lanes to "jug handle" left turn designs. The Turf Inn driveway is well designed and its wide separation of inbound and outbound flow optimizes vehicular movements from Wolf, Road. There are commercial land users on both sides of Wolf Road but access drives are spaced sufficiently far apart to minimize entry exit conflicts with Wolf Road through traffic. The physical and operational driving environment in the vicinity of the Turf Inn does not appear to present any unusual or unduly complicated situations which would tax the capability of the average driver. Sign Setback The Colonie zoning law provides a 15 foot setback for on premises advertising signs. From a technical and operational standpoint the maintenance of a setback for signs and other structures along a street or highway has two principal benefits. First, the setback can help establish a "clear zone" alongside the street edge which is free of fixed objects and an aid to errant drivers whose vehicles leave the travelled way. Secondly, the setback moves non - essential signs back from the roadside and provides a "cleaner" space for the installation of official traffic signs and signals. The Turf Inn sign was erroneously located 11.7 feet from the property • line rather than the required 15 feet. This leaves the overhanging edge of the sign 38.4 feet from the curb and the sign foundation 39 feet from the curb. The 39 setback from the curb leaves the sign well placed with respect to any "clear zone" requirement. Even on high -speed rural roads 30 feet is considered good design. Few of our rural roads are so protected and it is unlikely that any urban arterials have been designed to such a high standard. Since there are numerous fixed objects (primarily trees and light poles) which are now much closer to the edge of Wolf Road, the clear zone concept appears academic as applied to the Turf Inn sign. The Turf Inn sign does not interfere with any existing traffic sign and there is ample space to add traffic signs without concern for, conflict with the existing advertising sign. In summary the 3.3 foot error in placement of the Turf Inn sign is a trivial one in technical and safety terms and has not had nor will it have any effect upon operational safety. Sign Effectiveness The consultant briefly evaluated the effectiveness of the current operational tecniques during the initial site visit. The messages being run on those days were excessively long and diminish the advertising value of the sign. This has been discussed with the manager of the Turf Inn. Considering the speed of the traffic stream and the visibility of the sign a message length of 5 -10 seconds would be most efficient. • ALAN M. VOORHEES & ASSOCIATES. INC. TRANSPORTATION• AND URBAN PLANNING CONSULTANTS BOSTON. MASS. SIGN EVALUATION AND STUDY VARIABLE MESSAGE INDICATORS MAPLE SHADE, NEW JERSEY • WALL TOWNSHIP, NEW JERSEY PREPARED FOR STATE OF NEW JERSEY AMERICAN SIGN AND INDICATOR CORP. MC.LEAN. VA MARCH 1978 A_P!anning Research Company In the opinion of the author, review of the proposed message indicators in relation to safety and traffic engineering implica- tiors revealed no significant impacts or safety hazards would be encountered. This opinion is based in part on technical analysis, in part on the experience records of two previous installations, and cn the reasons indicated below: o Safety Considerations • SL.7n Elements SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 1) Accidents -- Research has indicated that both Rte. -73 in Maple Shade and Rte. -34 in wall Town- ship, in the sign area, are free from any apparent geometric or safety deficiencies. Research has indicated none of the accidents could be attributed to the indicators, and that the rate of accidents is what normally would be expected, given the volumes and geometrics. 2) Research of accidents at two functioning sign locations revealed no direct causal effects with respect . to the indicator. 3) Stopping Sight Distance criteria are all satisfied with respect to accepted standards and guidelines. Sign Sight Distance criteria are considered accep- table speeds inventoried, recommended message frequency and location of the installation. Letter Size, Proportion /Spacing, Illumination, Background, Readability and Placement Angle, have all been judged by the author to be acceptable and considered in keeping with good and standard Drac 4 ce Cif the irdusl'rt' _ Driver Interaction 1) Discussions of Scan Rates, Recognition, Selective Attention and Visual Information Processing, have all been positive with respect to the proposed installation. It is suggested that a display frequency of three seconds (t.Lmed from start of one message to start of second message) cra d be appropriate for both conditions. Reading times are estimated to approximate one message /second. • Three major items constitute the basic design criteria of advertising signs and include legibility, information processing and highway safety. From the proper blending and implementation of the.above factors, the results of perception, recognition, absorption, retention, and appropriate action are desired from the motorist to create a situation of positive operational control. Private highway advertising signs, billboards, and indicators, are not standardized and reflect many items by their presence.. C. LEGIBILITY Sign legibility is a function of the following items: Letter Size Federal Standards recommend a minimum of 12 inches for numbers and 8 inches for words on Motorist Information Signs at' highway speeds. o The Maple Shade indicator exhibits 16 -inch characters and the Wall Township indicator displays 24 -inch characters, which more than satisfies the minimum size requirements for visibility. . , • It has been. determined that an ind letter can be recognized at the rate of 1 "/50 ft. of viewing distance. o Sixteen -inch letters can, therefore, be recognized at a distance of 800 feet. c Twenty - four inch letters can be recognized at a dis- tance of 1200 feet. o Grouping the letters into words _educes the legible distance for 16 -inch letters to a:ia_oxi-atc1v 675 feet and for 24 -inch letters to 1000 feet, for an average driver with normal visual acuity of 20/20. Consequently, normal legibility would be .limited to 675 feet either side of the sign due to grouping for 16 -inch letters and to 1000 feet for 24 -inch characters. When the letters /Words are internally lighted, visibility :increases at larger letter sizes, but remains approximately the same for small /medium heights. Direct illumination, where the characters are the principal source of light and appear against a dark background, enhances the readability of the message. At 16 inches in height, exposed lamp letters can be viewed at approximately 670 feet, or approximately the same distance as non - illuminated groupings at the medium sizes. Consequently, for the purpose of this study, the available readable distance will be 670 feet either side of the sign in Maple Shade. At 24 inches, the distance is again 1000 feet, or exactly the same as non - illuminated groupings, and will be used for the purpose of this study in Wall Township. Proportion /Spacing Width and spacing of letters also contribute to readability and recognition. Many studies have :.indicated that in a restricted space, the words are most readable when they fill up the space as much as possible. If no spatial restrictions exist, a definable border was found more legible. In the case of both message indicators, a definable border would exist as the message is displayed and should consequently aid in readability. . INFORMATIONAL PROCESSING Scan Rates /Reading Times Numerous studies have indicated measured scan rates under various conditions of stimulus; pre - exposure, past exposure,, noise, interference, and learning curve processes. The fastest rates recorded indicated the eye could scan one letter every 10 cosec or 100 letters /sec. Briefly printed displays were measured at one letter per 100 msec or 10 letters/ second. On the average,. scan rates can be said to occur at one letter /50 cosec or 20 letters /sec. Reading is far more complex than simple letter scanning and is far beyond the scope of this report to explore. Variables, such as age, visual acuity, sleep, glare, contrast illumin- ation, and individual sensory capability, all enter the complex equation. Due to the complexity of the problem very few researchers are willing to set hard rates zur reading times, but rather, estimate an ranges the times required. A glance to read a target a five degree arc requires from .G to 1.0 seconds to accomplish the task. In general, researchers have indicated that a reasonable limit might be four words per second. Consequently, to be conservative in the safety analysis, a reading time of 1 thought second will be assumed for both indicators. Recognition From the point of view of perceptual tasks, recognition is a fundamental ability. ...The phenomenon of recognition is the activity that allows a driver to see an object, or situation, and ira*n ediately' understand what it is. Famil ar At a frequency of 0 /1, the time /distance between messages is controlled by the ISI and ten messages could be flashed. At a two - second frequency, .six messages could be read. At a three- second frequency, four messages; at a five-second frequency, three messages; and at an eight - second frequency, two messages. Based upon the time eyes would be "off- the - road ", (this is a misnomer as sign is in 20 standard cone of vision until the last few feet and eyes would in essence not be off the road), it is reasonable to function at a frequency. of three seconds, resulting in a reading distance of 323.2 feet out of a possible 1000' available distance. At this frequency, a total of 12. O seconds cycle time and four messages could be displayed with a reasonable • "off - the - road" time of 33 percent. The 323.2feet traveled would be divided into four intervals, each 80.8 ft. in length (1 second) and result in reasonable and normal off -the -road scan times for the speeds inventoried. Again, it should be remembered that when driver attention is on the indicator, the vision cone still includes the roadway immediately in front of the vehicle due to the cone requirements and the selective attention process of the eye. Any unusual stimulus, such as a brake light, vehicle intrusion, etc., would be noticed and reacted to accordingly.