Item 25 - GPA to Permit Three Outdoor Offsite Advertising Billboards — Yucaipa City Council, June 27, 2022 (part 1 of 2)

Agenda Item No. 25

CITY OF YUCAIPA

AGENDA REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Fennin Preciado, Director of Development Services Benjamin J. Matlock, Planning Manager/City Planner.

FOR: City Council Meeting of June 27, 2022
SUBJECT: Electronic Messaging Centers (GPA/DCA/CUP/DA)
A General Plan Amendment to modify Policy CDL-4.6, Outdoor Signage of the General Plan to permit up to three outdoor offsite advertising billboards, and a Development Code Amendment (Ordinance No. 393) to amend Chapter 7 (Sign Regulations) of Division 7 (General Design Standards) of the Development Code to amend regulations pertaining to Electronic Messaging Center Billboards General Outdoor Advertising (21-096/CUP/DA): Conditional Use Permit and Development Agreement (Ordinance No. 408) to pen -nit an Electronic Messaging Center Billboard on an existing commercial property located at 13500 Calumesa Boulevard. APN:0318-212-19
Leonard and Company (21-104/CUP/DA): A Conditional Use Permit and Development Agreement (Ordinance No. 409) to pen -nit an Electronic Messaging Center Billboard that will replace an existing static billboard located on an existing conunercial property at 31103 Outer Highway, APN: 0300-101-19 General Outdoor Advertising (21-154/CUP/DA): A Conditional Use Permit and Development Agreement (Ordinance No. 410) to permit an Electronic Messaging Center Billboard that will replace an existing static billboard on an existing commercial property located at 31547 Outer Highway 10, APN: 0300-161-13 RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council conduct a public hearing and review the Planning Commission's recommendation to:
1) Adopt Resolution No. 2021-21, approving the General Plan Amendment to Policy CDL-4.6; and
MO

City Council Meeting of June 27, 2022
EMC GPA and Ordinance No. 3 93, and Cases 21-096, 21-104, and 21-154

Page 2 ends

2) Approve first reading, by the title only, as read by staff, of Ordinance No. 396, amending Ordinance No. 343, amending the Official Land Use Plan and Zoning Ordinance as adopted by the City of Yucaipa; and
3) Approve the Conditional Use Permit (21-096), subject to the Conditions of Approval as contained in the Agenda Report, and the Development Agreement (Ordinance No 408); and 4) Approve the Conditional Use Permit (21-104), subject to the Conditions of Approval as contained in the Agenda Report, and the Development Agreement (Ordinance No 409); and 5) Approve the Conditional Use Permit (21-154), subject to the Conditions of Approval as contained in the Agenda Report, and the Development Agreement (Ordinance No 410); and 6) Adopt the Findings as contained in this Agenda Report; and 7) Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, finding the mitigation measures and standard measures and procedures will reduce the potential level of environmental impact to less than significant; and 8) Direct staff to file a Notice of Determination; and, 9) Review, and if it is considered acceptable, approve the architectural design for the proposed Projects.

The City Council may approve all items listed or otherwise modify the proposed Ordinance and/or take separate actions for each individual application.

City Council Meeting of June 27, 2022
EMC GPA and Ordinance No. 393, and Cases 21-096, 21-104, and 21-154

Page 3 ends

DISCUSSION:

Project Background:

The City of Yucaipa's Development Code (Section 87.0710, Prohibited Signs) and General Plan (Policy CDL-4.6) does not currently allow for the construction and operation of new billboards within the City's jurisdictional boundaries. The City has received requests to permit the construction of Electronic Messaging Centers ("EMCs") light -emitting diode (LED) billboards within the City by two different applicants ("Project Proponents"), and to in order to permit the Project, Section

87.0710 is proposed to be amended to remove the complete prohibition off -site advertising, and an addition to Section 87.0725 has been drafted to provide regulations for off -premises advertising for an EMC. Further, an amendment to Policy CDL-4.6 of the General Plan is also proposed to allow for a limited number of EMCs within the City.

Planning Commission Hearing:

The proposals were presented to the Planning Commission at a public hearing during their regular meeting of May 18, 2022. As part of the discussion, the Planing Commission noted that they were in favor of the proposed gateway -type signage, as well as electronic signs in general, but felt that the gateway features would be appropriate if limited to one (1) per offramp location, which would impact the approval of either Case No. 21-104 or 21-154. Due to the partial recusal of a Planning Commissioner near the project proposed under Case No. 21-154, the Planning Commission did not feel it would be appropriate for their actions to ultimately select the preferred Yucaipa Boulevard sign but recommended that their discussion be provided for Council's consideration. hi addition, several Commissioners noted support for an ordinance that would address existing, legal nonconforming billboard structures where a provision would allow for the enhancement and conversion of those signs to a digital billboard. It should be noted that these provisions are not contemplated by this Project; separate Council direction would be necessary to assess and develop such an ordinance. For reference, there are a total of 19 static billboards located along Interstate 10, and several additional structures located throughout the City.

Project Design and Description:

The Project consists of two different, but related actions that are necessary for the project to be approved by the City. The first part of the Project is a General Plan Amendment and Development Code Amendment ("Amendments") to establish the regulatory scheme necessary to permit off -site advertising EMCs within the City of Yucaipa. The second part of the Project is the Conditional Use Permits and Development Agreements ("Use Pen -nit") applications to allow for the construction of EMCs, consistent with the provisions of the Amendments, and pertains to the individual submittals that have been received by the Project Proponents.

General Plan Amendment:

The City's Comununity Design and Land Use Element (CLD) includes a variety of policies intended to promote a high -quality aesthetic enviromnent, with Goal CDL-4 promoting "Attractive and visually unified corridors that beautify and strengthen the City's identity, image, and aesthetics while retaining design identities." Policy CDL-4.6, Outdoor Signage, currently states -441-

City Council Meeting of June 27, 2022
EMC GPA and Ordinance No. 393, and Cases 21-096, 21-104, and 21-154

Page 4 ends

"Prohibit outdoor off -site advertising billboards (but not on -site signs identifying a business on the same property). Require adherence to signage regulations in the municipal code.

Create more tailored signage regulations for scenic roadways." In order to pen -nit EMCs within the City, the proposed Project would involve amending Policy CDL-4.6 to permit up to three (3) EMC billboards within the City, which reflects all of the current proposals that have been submitted. The updated policy, included as part of Resolution No. 2022- 21, would be as follows:
"To enhance the aesthetic environment of the freeway corridor and provide opportunities for a gateway feature, up to three (3) new outdoor off -site electronic advertising billboards that include a decorative structure along with city -identifying elements shall be permitted on privately -owned parcels through a discretionary review process. All other outdoor off -site advertising billboards (but not on -site signs identifying a business on the same property) shall be prohibited on privately -owned parcels. Require adherence to signage regulations in the municipal code. Create more tailored signage regulations for scenic roadways." There are two additional policies within the General Plan that reference billboards, CDL-4.7, and CDL-8.6. However, the permitting of an EMC would be consistent with these policies, provided that the proposal, along with the regulations proposed for the Development Code, support Projects that promote improvements to the visual quality of the area. These policies will be accomplished through the implementation of decorative structures for each billboard Development Code Amendment:

Section 87.0710, Prohibited Signs, of the City's Development Code currently prohibits "Permanent primary signs which advertise or identify a business, function, establishment or product at a location other than the property on which such business or establishment is located or such product is manufactured or sold." To accoimmodate an EMC within the City of Yucaipa, the Project includes a Development Code Amendment (Ordinance No. 393) that modifies Section 87.0710 to exempt EMC signs if pennitted under the City's Electronic Messaging Center Billboard requirements and develops Section 87.0725(c) to provide the Electronic Messaging Center Billboard requirements.

Section 87.0725(c) includes a variety of provisions that would govern the pennitting, siting and perfonnance requirements for any EMC proposed within the City. The Development Code would require that EMCs are reviewed through the City's discretionary Conditional Use Pen -nit Process.

EMCs would be limited to comnnercially-designated properties within the City's Interstate 10 corridor, and focused along the gateways to the City. Proposed EMCs would feature sign faces that are less than 680 square feet, be limited on brightness output that meets or exceeds state requirements, and be limited to a static message or image that is displayed for a minimum of eight (8) consecutive seconds before changing. Each EMC structure would also be required to feature a decorative top and base treatment that can enhance the visual quality of the sign and provide defined monumentation at the City's gateways, consistent with the amended General Plan policy.

Conditional Use Permit(s):
-442-

City Council Meeting of June 27, 2022
EMC GPA and Ordinance No. 393, and Cases 21-096, 21-104, and 21-154

Page 5 ends

The proposed Project consists of three separate Conditional Use Permits for the development of EMC structures that are designed to be consistent with the draft Development Code Amendment and would complete the discretionary review process required for these specific signs. All three proposals have digital display measuring 14' 1.5" by 48' 2.5" that provides a total sign area of 672 square feet, and include an architectural treatment consisting of a decorative top that includes a mountain motif, which provides a homage to the City of Yucaipa logo, and "City of Yucaipa" text in reverse -lit lettering, as well as a corresponding decorative base treatment feature complete with a City logo. All of the signs would also include a dinner system that adjusts the sign output based on existing exterior lighting conditions, with a timer system that can adjust display output during nighttime hours as a redundant backup system, to address light -related concerns.

The Project proposals also have the following characteristics:

Case No. 21-096
The proposed EMC is located at 13500 Calimesa Boulevard (APN: 0318-212-19), which is a developed site that features automotive repair uses and is designated as CS (Service Commercial) by the City's General Plan. The sign structure height is approximately 62 feet, when measured from the existing ground level at the subject site, and will be located within an approximate lease area of 16 feet by 12 feet (192 square feet). No existing billboards are currently located at the subject site; however, the Development Agreement proposes the removal of a billboard along Yucaipa Boulevard, west of 2nd Street.

Case No. 21-104
The proposed EMC is located at 31107 Outer Highway 10 (APN: 0300-101-19), which is developed site that features retail sales of truck trailers and an existing static billboard that would be removed, and is designated as CS (Service Commercial) by the City's General Plan. The sign structure height is approximately 55 feet, when measured from the existing ground level at the subject site, and will be located within an approximate lease area of 6 feet by 10 feet (60 square feet). As part of the Project design, louvers are proposed to be installed along the southern edge of the sign faces to further obstruct any light that could be cast outside of the sign's viewing angle.

Case No. 21-154
The proposed EMC is located at 31547 Outer Highway 10 (APN: 0300-161-13), which is developed site that features a self -storage facility and an existing static billboard that would be removed, and is designated as CS (Service Commercial) by the City's General Plan. The sign structure height is approximately 59 feet, when measured from the existing ground level at the subject site, and will be located within an approximate lease area of 16 feet by 12 feet (192 square feet).

Development Aweement:

The project developers for each sign have requested the use of a development agreement with the City to identify the developer's and City's responsibilities to obtain the mutural benefits of the Project. To strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in -443-

City Council Meeting of June 27, 2022
EMC GPA and Ordinance No. 393, and Cases 21-096, 21-104, and 21-154

Page 6 ends

comprehensive plamning and reduce the economic risk of development, the Legislature of the State of California had adopted the Development Agreement Regulations, which authorizes any city to enter into binding development agreements establishing certain development rights in real property with persons having legal or equitable interests in such property. Section 65864 of the Development Agreement Regulations expressly provides as follows:
"The Legislature finds and declares that:
"(a) The lack of certainty in the approval of development projects can result in a waste of resources, escalate the cost of housing and other development to the consumer, and discourage investment in and a cornrnitment to comprehensive planning which would make maximum efficient utilization of resources at the least economic cost to the public. "(b) Assurance to the applicant for a development project that upon approval of the project, the applicant may proceed with the project in accordance with existing policies, rules and regulations, and subject to conditions of approval will strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning, and reduce the economic cost of development.
(c) The lack of public facilities, including, but not limited to, streets, sewerage, transportation, drinking water, school, and utility facilities, is a serious impediment to the development of new housing. Whenever possible, applicants and local governments may include provisions in agreements whereby applicants are reimbursed over time for financing public facilities."
Section 65865.2 of the California Government Code provides that "A development agreement shall specify the duration of the agreement, the pennitted uses of the property, the density or intensity of use, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, and provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes. The development agreement may include conditions, teens, restrictions, and requirements for subsequent discretionary actions, provided that such conditions, terns, restrictions, and requirements for subsequent discretionary actions shall not prevent development of the land for the uses and to the density or intensity of development set forth in the agreement. The agreement may provide that construction shall be commenced within a specified time and that the project or any phase thereof be completed within a specified tune. The agreement may also include terns and conditions relating to applicant financing of necessary public facilities and subsequent reimbursement over time."
The Development Agreements for each sign have been developed between staff and the project applicants, and has comparable deal points, including a revenue cost share of advertising revenue, a local business program that provides discounted advertising rates, available advertising space for City -sponsored advertising for events, and each call for the removal of an existing static billboard as to not increase the net number of existing billboard structures within the City. As noted previously, two sites feature existing billboard structures that would be removed, and the third Project would remove an existing billboard at 34855 Yucaipa Blvd, which is visible as one approaches the 2' Street roundabout for the Uptown District.

Processing and Procedural Actions:

Notices of the project were sent to all surrounding property owners within a 300-foot radius of each of the project sites and several written responses were received for the two projects located along

City Council Meeting of June 27, 2022
EMC GPA and Ordinance No. 393, and Cases 21-096, 21-104, and 21-154

Page 7 ends

Outer Highway 10. Their concerns included light pollution from the proposed digital screens, as well as general concerns of rural appearance of the City being lost with such projects. One public comment was also received over the phone following the Notice of Public Hearing for the Planning Commission meeting which requested that the City pen -nit additional billboards beyond the three that are proposed.

Environmental Review:

The Initial Study prepared as part of an initial proposal (Case No. 19-155), which was made available for continent for 30 days beginning on April 27, 2020 and ending on May 27, 2020. After the public review period for the MND, the applicant for the Use Pen -nit withdrew their application following their negotiations with the underlying property owner of the specific EMC site, and no formal action of the Amendments were taken. Following the withdrawal of the original Use Permit, three new Use Pen -nits for EMCs (Case Nos. 21-096, 21-104, and 21-154) have been submitted by two different applicants, one of which was the original applicant for Case No. 19-155. To address project -related changes, a Recirculated MND was prepared and was made available for agency and public review and comment for a 30-day period beginning on March 28, 2022, and ending on April 27, 2022. Together, the RMND considers the potential enviromnental impacts that could occur as a result of the Project. The Planning Commission reviewed the analysis conducted by staff, and recoinmends adoption of a RMND, noting that all available evidence indicates that any adverse impacts that could occur are at a less -than -significant level. Three (3) comments were received on the Initial Study during the public review processes by local, regional or state agencies, or by members of the public, and a Response to Comments has been prepared.

CONCLUSION:

The proposed Use Pen -nits require a General Plan Amendment and Development Code Amendment prior to their approvals, and associated amendments have been prepared for consideration. Pursuant to the City's Development Code, these actions require a recommendation from the Planning Commission to the City Council, which was provided during their regular meeting of May 18, 2022.

The proposed Use Permits have been designed to be consistent with the proposed legislative amendments, and the required findings for approval of the General Plan Amendment, Development Code and Conditional Use Permits have been made and are attached should the City Council ultimately approve the projects. It should be noted that the approval can include all, or portions of the overall Project.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Based on the Development Agreements, the City would receive a cost share of revenues generated from each sign, and would also be able to advertise City -sponsored events.

Attachments: General Plan Amendment Findings
Development Code Amendment Findings
Conditional Use Permit Findings
Minutes from May 18, 2022 Planning Commission hearing
Resolution No. 2022-21
Ordinance No. 393
Conditions of Approval
-445-

City Council Meeting of June 27, 2022
EMC GPA and Ordinance No. 393, and Cases 21-096, 21-104, and 21-154

Page 8 ends

Approved by:
r
Project Comments
Development Agreements and associated Ordinances
Environmental review documents, including
• Recirculated Mitigated Negative Declaration,
• Response to Comments
• Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Plan
(Under separate cover, accessible here:
hLtps://ygcaipa.org/environmental-review/#tab-161' 85 824-9-10) Project Plans
Ems

City Council Meeting of June 27, 2022
EMC GPA and Ordinance No. 393, and Cases 21-096, 21-104, and 21-154

Page 9 ends

FFl DINGS: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (Resolution No. 2022-21) The Initial Study prepared for this proposal adequately discusses the potential impacts of the Project and indicates that all potentially significant environmental impacts that could occur are at a level that is considered to be less -than -significant. The Project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment.

2. The proposed General Plan Amendment is to permit billboard signage and would not require water supply connections.

3. The proposed General Plan Amendment is in the public interest, there will be a coimnunuty benefit, and other existing and permitted uses will not be compromised, because the Amendment will provide opportunities for a City gateway feature near its offramps, and provide opportunities for advertising of local businesses and city -sponsored events.

4. The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with CDL-4.7, and CDL-8.6 of the General Plan, and it will provide for a conunercial sign structures along commercial properties along Interstate 10, and would include decorative features that provide monumentation to the City of Yucaipa.

5. The proposed General Plan Amendment does not conflict with provisions of this Code, or any applicable specific plan, because Ordinance No. 393 is included with the proposal and includes objective criteria for the review and approval of billboard structures through a discretionary review process.
-447-

City Council Meeting of June 27, 2022
EMC GPA and Ordinance No. 393, and Cases 21-096, 21-104, and 21-154

Page 10 ends

FINDINGS: DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT (Ordinance No. 393) The proposed Development Code Amendment is consistent with the General Plan and its policies and objectives because it has been developed to implement the amended General Plan Policy CDL-4.6, and includes provisions to enhance the public's health, safety, and general welfare, and to meet the requirements of State law.

City Council Meeting of June 27, 2022
EMC GPA and Ordinance No. 393, and Cases 21-096, 21-104, and 21-154

Page 11 ends

FINDINGS: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.21-096
The Initial Study prepared for this proposal adequately discusses the potential impacts of the Project and indicates that all potentially significant enviromnental impacts that could occur are at a level that is considered to be less -than -significant. The Project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment.

2. The site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to acconu-nodate the proposed use and all yards, open spaces, walls and fences, parking areas, landscaping, and other features pertaining to the application, because the site is large enough and the design is configured to accommodate the proposed project and accompanying features.

3. The site for the proposed use has adequate access because the site provides a connection from Calimesa Boulevard, and has been designed to meet applicable City standards.

4. The proposed use will not have a substantial adverse effect on abutting property or the pennitted use thereof, meaning that the use will not generate excessive noise, vibration, traffic, or other disturbances, because: 1) The project design and conditions of approval include provisions regarding the light output that exceed state requirements, and redundant systems are proposed to support these design elements; 2) hnprovements will be conditioned to occur prior to completion of the site development; 3) A flag test was conducted to verify the height in which the proposed sign would be visible; 4) LEDs are inherently highly directional in their emission of light as a 90-degree diode installed on the sign means that the light emission duninishes to 50% of brightness at 45 degrees from horizontal center, and zero light emission at 90 degrees, thereby controlling all side -lighting and preventing light trespass impacts, with additional molded louvers included to further address light spill; 5) Adequate internal circulation is available and/or required for Fire Department access and adequate parking remains onsite for the existing commercial uses; 6) Adequate on -site retention of stone water run-off will occur.

In addition, the use will not substantially interfere with the present or future ability to use solar energy systems because the height of the proposed sign and sign structure area will not substantially hinder the use of such devices on surrounding properties.

5. The proposed use is consistent with the goals, policies, standards, and snaps of the General Plan and any applicable plan, because the proposed use is pennitted along the Interstate 10 corridor, within general proximity to the City's interchanges, provided the corresponding General Plan Amendment and Development Code Amendment is approved, subject to the provisions of this Conditional Use Pen -nit.

6. The lawful conditions stated in the approval are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare, because they ensure adequate circulation, drainage, and compatibility with surrounding land uses.

7. The design of the site has considered the potential
passive or natural heating and cooling opportunities,
collection of solar energy or the natural movement
properties.
for the use of solar energy systems and
because there are no obstructions to the
of wind toward or around surrounding
012

City Council Meeting of June 27, 2022
EMC GPA and Ordinance No. 393, and Cases 21-096, 21-104, and 21-154

Page 12 ends

FINDINGS: CONDITIONAL USE PERA7IT NO.21-104

1. The Initial Study prepared for this proposal adequately discusses the potential impacts of the Project and indicates that all potentially significant environmental impacts that could occur are at a level that is considered to be less -than -significant. The Project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment.

2. The site for the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use and all yards, open spaces, walls and fences, parking areas, landscaping, and other features pertaining to the application, because the site is large enough and the design is configured to accommodate the proposed project and accompanying features.

3. The site for the proposed use has adequate access because the site provides a connection from Outer Highway 10, and has been designed to meet applicable City standards.

4. The proposed use will not have a substantial adverse effect on abutting property or the pennitted use thereof, meaning that the use will not generate excessive noise, vibration, traffic, or other disturbances, because: 1) The project design and conditions of approval include provisions regarding the light output that exceed state requirements, and redundant systems are proposed to support these design elements; 2) Improvements will be conditioned to occur prior to completion of the site development; 3) A flag test was conducted to verify the height hi which the proposed sign would be visible; 4) LEDs are inherently highly directional in their emission of light as a 90-degree diode installed on the sign means that the light emission diminishes to 50% of brightness at 45 degrees from horizontal center, and zero light emission at 90 degrees, thereby controlling all side -lighting and preventing light trespass impacts, with additional molded louvers included to further address light spill; 5) Adequate internal circulation is available and/or required for Fire Department access and adequate parking remains onsite for the existing commercial uses; 6) Adequate on -site retention of storm water run-off will occur.

5. The proposed use is consistent with the goals, policies, standards, and maps of the General Plan and any applicable plan, because the proposed use is pennitted along the Interstate 10 corridor, within general proximity to the City's interchanges, provided the corresponding General Plan Amendment and Development Code Amendment is approved, subject to the provisions of this Conditional Use Permit.

7. The design of the site has considered the potential for the use of solar energy systems and passive or natural heating and cooling opportunities, because there are no obstructions to the collection of solar energy or the natural movement of wind toward or around surrounding properties.
-450-

City Council Meeting of June 27, 2022
EMC GPA and Ordinance No. 393, and Cases 21-096, 21-104, and 21-154

Page 13 ends

FINDE�TGS: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.21-154

1. The Initial Study prepared for this proposal adequately discusses the potential impacts of the Project and indicates that all potentially significant environunental impacts that could occur are at a level that is considered to be less -than -significant. The Project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment.

3. The site for the proposed use has adequate access because the site provides a connection from Outer Highway 10, and has been designed to meet applicable City standards.

4. The proposed use will not have a substantial adverse effect on abutting property or the permitted use thereof, meaning that the use will not generate excessive noise, vibration, traffic, or other disturbances, because: 1) The project design and conditions of approval include provisions regarding the light output that exceed state requirements, and redundant systems are proposed to support these design elements; 2) Improvements will be conditioned to occur prior to completion of the site development; 3) A flag test was conducted to verify the height in which the proposed sign would be visible; 4) LEDs are inherently highly directional in their emission of light as a 90-degree diode installed on the sign means that the light emission diminishes to 50% of brightness at 45 degrees from horizontal center, and zero light emission at 90 degrees, thereby controlling all side -lighting and preventing light trespass impacts, with additional molded louvers included to further address light spill; 5) Adequate internal circulation is available and/or required for Fire Department access and adequate parking remains onsite for the existing commercial uses; 6) Adequate on -site retention of storm water run-off will occur.

The design of the site has considered the potential for the use of solar energy systems and passive or natural heating and cooling opportunities, because there are no obstructions to the collection of solar energy or the natural movement of wind toward or around surrounding properties.
-451-

Agenda Item No.

City of Yucaipa

PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting of May 18, 2022
A Regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Yucaipa, California was called to order in the Council Chambers, 34272 Yucaipa Boulevard, Yucaipa, on May 18, 2022, at 6:30 PM.

PRESENT: J.R. Allgower, Chair
Christopher Markarian, Vice Chair
Tony Hicks, Commissioner
Richard Beck, Commissioner
Lloyd Rekstad, Commissioner
Bart Brizzee, Commissioner
ABSENT: Aron Wolfe, Commissioner
CITY STAFF: Benjamin Matlock, City Planner/Planning Manager Madeline Jordan, Assistant Planner
Katrina Kunkel, Associate Engineer

CONVENE PLANNING COMMISSION
The meeting was called to order at 6:33 PM, with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Vice Chair Markarian.

ROLL CALL

PUBLIC COMMENT
One (1) email was sent to Publiccomment ibypcaipa.org. by Amanda Frye who expressed concerns over the impacts on wildlife and surrounding residential property owners caused by light and glare, and felt that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) should be required.

CONSENT AGENDA
The following Consent Agenda items are expected to be routine and non -controversial. The Planning Commission will act upon them, at one time, without discussion. Any Councilmember or staff member may request removal of an item from the Consent Agenda for discussion.

The title is deemed to be read, and further reading waived on any ordinance listed on the Consent Agenda for second reading and adoption.

Planning Commission Minutes Page 1
5-18-22 -452-

1. SUBJECT: Approve Item No. 1, Planning Commission Minutes of April 20, 2022 RECOMMENDATION: That the Commission approve the minutes from April 20, 2022.

ACTION: MOTION BY VICE CHAIR MARKARIAN, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER HICKS, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF APRIL 20, 2022. MOTION CARRIED 6-0-0-

1. (WOLFE WAS ABSENT).

NEW BUSINESS

2. SUBJECT: Levy Affiliated Holdings, LLC. (Architectural Review) Case No. 22-058/ARC: An Architectural Review Package for Case No. 21-094/CUP/DBA for the development of thirty-two (32) age -restricted senior housing units located on 4th Street between Yucaipa Blvd. and Ave. E; APN: 0319-012-40. The development is proposed to be called "Elizabeth Court."
Case No. 22-059/ARC: An Architectural Review Package for Case No. 21-086/CUP/DBA for the development of fifty-two (52) age -restricted senior housing units located at 12845 3rd Street; APN:
0319-121-42. The development is proposed to be called "Tildan Court." RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission review the proposed floor plans, colors, materials, and architectural designs for a total of eighty-four (84) senior housing units which are affiliated with Case Nos. 21-086/CUP/DBA and 21-094/CUP/DBA and approve Case Nos. 22- 058/ARC (Elizabeth Court) and 22-059/ARC (Tildan Court).

DISCUSSION: Assistant Planner Jordan presented the project and noted that the two (2) architectural review packages were combined into a single PowerPoint presentation because they are proposed to utilize the same floor plans and elevation styles across the two (2) project sites. It was highlighted that conceptual landscaping plans for Case No. 21-094/CUP/DBA (22-058/ARC) indicate that the existing chain link fence is to remain along the northern property line; however, this does not comply with the City's objective Multi -family Design Standards found in the Citywide Design Guidelines, and will be corrected during the Building and Safety plan check process.

The applicant's representative, Craig Heaps, reiterated that the property owner has opted for separate up -stairs and down -stairs units within each modular building to improve usability for the future tenants. He additionally noted that the third elevation style was provided based on staff s recommendation for more variability across the project sites.

Vice Chair Markarian expressed appreciation for this new design as it will increase accessibility for the senior residents served by the sites. He also asked if there are other modular style projects like this one in the City of Yucaipa. City Planner Matlock noted this would be the first. Heaps stated that there are similar projects being approved in other cities and that the modular homes will be inspected according to California state law as with any other new home construction.

Public Comment(s): Not Applicable
Planning Commission Minutes Page 2
5-18-22 -453-

ACTION: MOTION BY VICE CHAIR MARKARIAN, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BECK TO APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. MOTION CARRIED 6-0-0-1. (WOLFE WAS ABSENT).

PUBLIC HEARINGS: The order of Business for the Public Hearing Shall Be:

A. Staff Presentation
B. Applicant/Representative Presentation
C. Public Comments
D. Applicant Rebuttal (if necessary)
E. Public Hearing Closed
F. Commission Discussion

3. SUBJECT: Electronic Messaging Centers (GPA/DCA/CUP/DA): A General Plan Amendment to modify Policy CDL-4.6, Outdoor Signage of the General Plan to permit up to three outdoor offsite advertising billboards, and a Development Code Amendment (Ordinance No. 393) to amend Chapter 7 (Sign Regulations) of Division 7 (General Design Standards) of the Development Code to amend regulations pertaining to Electronic Messaging Center Billboards.

General Outdoor Advertising (21-096/CUP/DA): Conditional Use Permit and Development Agreement (Ordinance No. 408) to permit an Electronic Messaging Center Billboard on an existing commercial property located at 13500 Calimesa Boulevard. APN: 0318-212-19.

Leonard and Company (21-104/CUP/DA): A Conditional Use Permit and Development Agreement (Ordinance No. 409) to permit an Electronic Messaging Center Billboard that will replace an existing static billboard located on an existing commercial property at 31103 Outer Highway, APN: 0300-101-19.

General Outdoor Advertising (21-154/CUP/DA): A Conditional Use Permit and Development Agreement (Ordinance No. 410) to permit an Electronic Messaging Center Billboard that will replace an existing static billboard on an existing commercial property located at 31547 Outer Highway 10, APN: 0300-161-13.

RECOMMENDATION:

A) Adopt Resolution No. 2021-21, approving the General Plan Amendment to Policy CDL-

4.6; and
B) Approve first reading, by the title only, as read by staff, of Ordinance No. 393, amending Ordinance No. 343, amending the Official Land Use Plan and Zoning Ordinance as adopted by the City of Yucaipa; and
C) Approve the Conditional Use Permit (21-096), subject to the Conditions of Approval as contained in the Agenda Report, and the Development Agreement (Ordinance No 408), and
D) Approve the Conditional Use Permit (21-104), subject to the Conditions of Approval as contained in the Agenda Report, and the Development Agreement (Ordinance No 409), and
Planning Commission Minutes Page 3
5-18-22 -454-

E) Approve the Conditional Use Permit (21-154), subject to the Conditions of Approval as contained in the Agenda Report, and the Development Agreement (Ordinance No 410), and
F) Adopt the Findings as contained in this Agenda Report; and G) Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, finding the mitigation measures and standard measures and procedures will reduce the potential level of environmental impact to less than significant; and H) Direct staff to file a Notice of Determination; and, I) Review, and if it is considered acceptable, approve the architectural design for the proposed Projects.

DISCUSSION:

Vice Chair Markarian recused himself from the meeting given his proximity to the Project site for the legislative action and Case No. 21-154/CUP/DA. City Planner, Ben Matlock, presented the project.

Chair Allgower requested clarification on what the commission is voting on, as well as the CEQA determination. Matlock clarified that Vice Chair Markarian could not vote on the proposed General Plan Amendment, affiliated Ordinances and Case No. 21-154/CUP/DA. However, he could return to the Council Chambers to review and vote on Case No. 21-096/CUP/DA and Case No. 21- 104/CUP/DA later in the evening. Matlock noted that a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was updated from a prior project, and recirculated to address project changes, including the three (3) current proposals, as the original MND only assessed the potential for two (2) EMCs along the freeway.

Commissioner Hicks requested clarification on the size of the proposed signs and size of existing billboard signs that are to be replaced. Matlock provided the proposed height and clarified the details of the signs to be replaced. Chair Allgower asks if this proposed action includes a height standard. Matlock clarifies that the Ordinance will provide a maximum allowable height, and that heights for the current proposals were determined through a flag test to determine the visibility of the sign from different vantage points along the freeway.

Chair Allgower asked if the Planning Commission can revise the proposed three (3) sign limit and Matlock stated that Planning Commission can recommend adjusting the number of signs but notes that the CEQA review was completed based on the current proposals that result in three (3) new signs.

Commissioner Reksted asked for clarification that the GPA was limited to the freeway corridor area and if the Planning Commission would have the ability to review similar projects in the future.

City Planner Matlock clarified the question.

Planning Commission Minutes Page 4
5-18-22 -455-

Commissioner Hicks noted he was in favor the general project, but pointed out that the existing older signs along the freeway should also be updated in appearance. Chair Allgower agreed and Matlock suggested that staff could forward the discussion to the City Council about addressing the existing billboard signs, but noted that the current proposals on the agenda were applicant driven action items, therefore any policy change to allow for an update to existing signage would be a future and separate action by City Council.

Commissioner Brizzee requested examples of locations where similar signs are constructed and Matlock referred to the applicant to provide locations. One of the applicant's representatives, Craig Heaps for General Outdoor Advertising, clarified the location of their off -site sign to be removed, provided examples of locations of similar signs in other cities, and spoke of the revenue opportunities that the billboards will bring to the community. The applicant, Tim Lynch, also expanded on these details and noted that free advertising opportunities will be made available to local businesses.

Public Commenst:

1. Pamela Smyth who lives at 31133 Outer Highway 10 requested that the billboards be limited to 45 feet tall and expressed concerns about light coming into her home.

2. Rick Herling, who owns property within the City that he intends to develop, has an existing billboard. He requested that the Planning Commission consider allowing more than three (3) billboard signs because he would like to replace the existing sign with an updated LED display.

3. Cesear Marrufo spoke on behalf of City of Yucaipa Chamber of Commerce and noted that the Chamber voted unanimously in favor of the projects billboard expressing support for how they will help local businesses.

Commissioner Rekstad requested clarification on voting and City Planner Matlock explained how the vote could be broken down. The GPA and Ordinance were to be voted on first, then Case No. 21-154 could be reviewed, with the last two (2) voted on when Vice Chair Markarian rejoined the meeting.

Commissioner Hicks noted his opposition to three (3) signs within close proximity, stating that they seem to be city "monuments" that are better suited for only one near any specific entrance and exit from the city limits.

In response to Commissioner Brizee's question, Matlock noted that the Development Agreement has a 30-year timeline, after which the development agreement can be reviewed again so that future Planning Commissions and/or City Councils would have the ability to require signs to be updated.

Commissioner Beck concurred that he agreed with Hick's statement about only one (1) sign within proximity to a ramp location.

ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSONER HICKS, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER

BRIZEE TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL THAT THEY APPROVE STAFF

RECOMMENDATIONS A, B, F, G, H WITH CONSIDERATION TO ALLOW FOR THREE (3) BILLBOARDS BUT FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER REVISING THE Planning Commission Minutes Page 5
5-18-22 -456-

ORDINANCE TO LIMIT JUST ONE BILLBOARD WITHIN A CERTAIN PROXIMITY TO EACH INTERCHANGE EXIT. MOTION CARRIED 5-0-1-1. (VICE CHAIR MARKARIAN RECUSED, WOLFE WAS ABSENT).

Matlock presented Case No. 21-154/CUP/DA and Commissioner Hicks again stated his opposition to allowing three (3) signs within such close proximity. He also noted reluctancy to vote on Case No. 21-154 prior to hearing the other two (2) projects included as part of Agenda Item 3 given Vice Chair Markarian's recusal based on his proximity to the project site, since such action would impact either 21-096/CUP/DA or Case No. 21-104/CUP/DA.

Public Comment: None.

ACTION: MOTION BY COMMISSONER HICKS, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BECK TO RECOAUgEND TO CITY COUNCIL THAT THEY APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS E, F, G, H, L MOTION CARRIED 4-1-1-1. (VICE CHAIR MARKARIAN RECUSED, CHAIR ALLGOWER VOTED NO, WOLFE WAS ABSENT).

Vice Chair Markarian rejoined the meeting. City Planner Matlock presented the two (2) remaining projects as part of Agenda Item 3, and Vice Chair Markarian asked questions about the height and design of the signs, and a summary of the actions that were taken prior to his return to the meeting to understand the rules recommended. Matlock explained the flag test and that the Yucaipa themed signs had also been reviewed by the City's marketing committee.

Commissioner Markarian addressed the written public comments, recognizing their concerns, but noting that property views are not protected though Yucaipa's Development Code. He noted that he looks forward to the advertising opportunities and hopes to strike a balance between city growth and citizen safety.

Andy Goodman from Leonard & Company spoke on behalf of Case No. 21-104/CUP/DA. He expressed flexibility in the design based on commission feedback, discussed concerns from a private property owner/public commenter who they have met with, and explained that ambient light tests will be performed and the laws which limit brightness would be abided by. Vice Chair Markarian requested clarification on regulation of advertising content and Matlock clarified what is stated in the Development Agreement in regard to the restriction of offensive content.

Craig Heaps, representing General Outdoor Advertising, spoke on behalf of Case No. 21- 096/CUP/DA and reiterated the benefits of the billboards. He noted that his client had been working over the past few years to establish their signs and that the other applicant subsequently submitted their documentation for a third sign that closely resembles their proposed design.

Public Comments:

1. Pamela Smyth who lives at 31133 Outer Highway 10 spoke again and requested a change to the angle of the proposed sign near her property. She expressed opposition for the project for safety and environmental reasons, but was amendable to improvements.

Planning Commission Minutes Page 6
5-18-22 -457-

2. Rick Herling who owns property in Yucaipa reiterated his earlier sentiments to allow additional billboards for Vice Chair Markarian to hear.

3. Cesear Marrufo spoke on behalf of City of Yucaipa Chamber of Commerce and again expressed support.

Andy Goodman provided an applicant rebuttal for Leonard & Company and stated that they were willing to adjust the angle of the sign as much as is feasible for Mrs. Smyth. He said that they can complete another flag test and also noted that the billboard's lights are angled downward toward the freeway, which will be better than the light on the existing static billboard.

Commissioner Hicks stated that he cannot support Council's consideration for two (2) signs within the limits of a single interchange/off-ramp, and the Commissioners expressed concerns about the proximity of the two (2) billboards near Yucaipa Blvd. It was agreed to take the two (2) remaining projects as separate motions.

Case No. 21-096/CUP/DA
ACTION: MOTION BY VICE CHAIR 1VIARKARIAN, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER

HICKS TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL THAT THEY APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS C, F, G, H, I. MOTION CARRIED 6-0-0-1. (WOLFE WAS ABSENT).

Case No. 21-104/CUP/DA
ACTION: MOTION BY VICE CHAIR MARKARIAN, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER

BRIZEE TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL THAT THEY APPROVE STAFF

RECOMMENDATIONS D, F, G, H, I WITH THE ANGLE OF THE SIGN TO BE MODIFIED BASED ON CITY STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. MOTION CARRIED 5- 1-0-1. (HICKS VOTED NO, WOLFE WAS ABSENT).

Vice Chair Markarian echoed that the proximity concerns of the billboards be relayed to City Council for their determination on how to best manage the implementation of the billboards, noting that these may be fine as presented, or to have one selected as the official bookend.

4. SUBJECT: Encore Image. (Case No. 22-008/LUCR/MJV): A Land Use Compliance Review and Major Variance for the review of two monument signs and a freeway oriented accessory pylon sign at the Yucaipa Gateway Project (Case No. 18-150), which includes variances for the total number of freestanding signs and a forty percent increase in the square footage of the freeway oriented accessory pylon sign to permit a sign area of 280 square feet.

RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing, consider, and if appropriate:

A) Approve Major Variance and Land Use Compliance Review No. 22-008, subject to the Conditions of Approval as contained in this Agenda Report; and B) Adopt the Major Variance Findings as contained in the Agenda Report; and, Planning Commission Minutes Page 7
5-18-22 -458-

C) Find that the Project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15311 & 15305 of the State CEQA Guidelines.

D) Direct staff to file a Notice of Exemption.

DISCUSSION:

Assistant Planner Jordan presented the project on behalf of Christian Farmer, the project planner.

Commissioner Markarian requested clarification on 1) how the proposed sign compares to the existing freeway -oriented sign affiliated with the Yucaipa Pointe project, 2) if the project is a major or minor variance application, and 3) if there was a typo in the eastbound/westbound renderings of what the proposed sign would look like from the I-10 freeway.

Assistant Planner, Madeline Jordan confirmed there was a typo in the renderings and City Planner Matlock noted that the Yucaipa Pointe sign is taller, as it provides advertising space for a greater number of tenants within the commercial complex, but with compatible tenant panel sizes.

Additionally, there is Major Variance requested for the increased size of the freestanding sign, and a Minor Variance requested for the additional monument sign provided along the frontage of Oak Glen Road.

Public Comment: None
ACTION: MOTION BY VICE CHAIR A'IARKARIAN, SECOND BY BECK TO APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. MOTION CARRIED 6-0-0-1. (WOLFE WAS ABSENT).

5. SUBJECT: Case No. 22-063/GPA: City of Yucaipa General Plan Housing Element Update.

RECOMMEl�'DATION: That the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing, review the General Plan Update, and recommend to the City Council that they:

A) Approve first reading, by the title only, as read by staff, of Ordinance No. 407, amending Ordinance No. 343, amending the Official Land Use Plan and Zoning Ordinance as adopted by the City of Yucaipa to include the change the land use designation for a property located at the southeast corner of Oak Glen Road and Avenue E; and B) Adopt Resolution No. 2022-20, adopting the 6th Cycle Housing Element Update to the General Plan; and
C) Adopt an Addendum to the 2016 Yucaipa General Plan Environmental Impact Report in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and the CEQA Guidelines, as amended; and
D) Adopt the Findings as contained in the Agenda Report and related Ordinances and Resolutions; and
Planning Commission Minutes Page 8
5-18-22 -459-

E) Direct staff to file a Notice of Determination subsequent to certification of the Addendum to the 2016 General Plan Environmental Impact Report; and, F) Authorize and direct the City Manager and Planning Manager/City Planner to make any technical or clerical revisions of clarifications to the Housing Element as may be required by HCD in order to obtain a finding of substantial compliance with State law DISCUSSION:

Commissioner Brizzee recused himself from Council Chambers given his proximity to the proposed site to be rezoned that is associated with recommendation A. City Planner Ben Matlock presented the rezone request as part of the Housing Element, and clarified that a Draft of the Housing Element had previously been provided; this is a follow-up based from the feedback received from the State for consideration. Ordinance 407 would amend Ordinance No. 343 (Land Use Map), and cultural analysis has already been completed for the site.

ACTION: MOTION BY VICE CHAIR MARKARIAN, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BECK TO RECOMI%lEND TO CITY COUNCIL THAT THEY APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS 1(A), 3(C), 4(D), 5(E). MOTION CARRIED 5-0-1-1. (BRIZEE RECUSED, WOLFE WAS ABSENT).

Commissioner Brizzee rejoined the meeting. Matlock presented the rest of the Housing Element Update, and noted that the updated draft shows redlines where changes have been made based on the comments received from HCD. Matlock confirmed that senior housing projects can qualify as a part of the lower income categories, but that the RM-24 Land Use District is established to accommodate the very -low and low-income levels. In response to Chair Allgower, Matlock clarified that the Wine Country Specific Plan, which is currently being developed, is not increasing or reducing the density of allowable single-family residences, but rather reduces the minimum lot size criteria to free up land for agricultural purposes. There is no housing change from a policy level within this Specific Plan area other than better facilitating the intended development envisioned.

Additionally, Matlock pointed out that the recommendations within the staff report use a numerical format and is based off City Council staff report templates, but that the agenda is set up in an alphabetical format based on the formatting used for Planning Commission reports.

Public Comment: None
ACTION: MOTION BY VICE CHAIR MARKARIAN, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER

BECK TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL THAT THEY APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS 2(B), 3(C), 4(D), 5(E), 6(F). MOTION CARRIED 6-0-0-1. (WOLFE WAS ABSENT).

ANNOUNCEMENTS: Planning Manager Matlock noted that the next meeting would be in two (2) weeks on June 1, 2022, and that he appreciated everyone's commitment throughout the long evening.

Planning Commission Minutes Page 9
5-18-22 -460-

PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURNED: 10:21 PM
Benjamin Matlock JR Allgower
Planning Manager/City Planner Chair of the Planning Commission Planning Commission Minutes Page 10
5-18-22 -461-

RESOLUTION NO. 2022 -21

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

YUCAIPA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO
POLICY CDL-4.6 OF THE YUCAIPA GENERAL PLAN
WHEREAS, on June 22, 2022, the City Council of the City of Yucaipa conducted a duly noticed public hearing, as required by law, on General Plan Amendment (GPA) No. 21-096, 21-104, and 21-154 to amend Policy CDL-4.6 in accordance with State law; and
WHEREAS, California Government Code Sections 65353 and 65354 require that prior to adoption of any proposed amendment to the General Plan, the Planning Commission shall first review, approve and recommend to the City Council the adoption of any such proposed amendment; and
WHEREAS, on May 18, 2022, the Planning Commission of the City of Yucaipa held a duly noticed public hearing as required by Government Code Section 65353 regarding the proposed amendment to the General Plan, and recommended to the City Council adoption of a Resolution to amend the City's General Plan Policy as part of Project Nos. 21-096, 21-104, and 21-154; and
WHEREAS, the project proponents are General Outdoor Advertising and Leonard and Company; and
WHEREAS, the Resolution is a proposed amendment to the General Plan of the City of Yucaipa consisting of a revised Policy CDL-4.6; and WHEREAS, the General Plan Amendment is in the public interest, and there will be a community benefit, due to the implementation of City gateway features near its offramps, and will provide opportunities for advertising of local businesses and city - sponsored events; and
WHEREAS, the General Plan Amendment is consistent with other General Plan goals and policies; and
WHEREAS, the General Plan Amendment will not have a substantial adverse effect on surrounding properties as any future project will require improvements and include development standards to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FOUND, DETERMINED, AND RESOLVED
by the City Council of the City of Yucaipa as follows:

1. The information set forth in the Recitals above is true and accurate in all respects.
-462-

2. Ordinance No. 393, in conjunction with the other components of the proposed Electronic Messaging Center Billboard Project was described and evaluated in accordance with the California Envirorunental Quality Act (CEQA), resulting in the preparation of a Recirculated Mitigated Negative Declaration (RMND) to determine the level of envirorunental impacts associated with the Project that could result in the development of new Electronic Messaging Centers within the City of Yucaipa. Based on the analysis contained in the RMND and other evidence in the record, the City Council, exercising its independent judgment, hereby finds that the project will not have a significant environmental impact with the adoption of the identified mitigation measures, adopts the RMND, and adopts the attached Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). The documents and other materials constituting the record of proceedings are located at the P1amling Offices at Yucaipa City Hall, 34272 Yucaipa Boulevard, Yucaipa, California.

3. Yucaipa General Plan Policy CDL-4.6 is hereby amended to read in full as follows:

To enhance the aesthetic envirorunent of the freeway corridor and provide opportunities for a P-ateway feature, up to three (3) new outdoor off -site electronic advertising billboards that include a decorative structure along with city -
identifyin. elements shall be permitted on privately -owned parcels through a discretionary review process. All other outdoor off -site advertising billboards (but not on -site signs identifying a business on the same property) shall be prohibited on privately -owned parcels. P-roles-outdeet---o�4te-ad-v€4ising-b-i lboar-ds-(bit net erg-sf gibs enti b tsi ss-en tl3e same -pre}eFty} Require adherence to signage regulations in the municipal code. Create more tailored signagc regulations for scenic roadways.

4. Pursuant to California Goveminent Code Section 65300.5, general plan policies must be internally consistent. The City Council finds that the General Plan will continue to be internally consistent upon the adoption of amended Policy CDL-4.6.

5. Based on the findings as contained in the Agenda Report, the City Council hereby approves the General Plan Amendment to amend Policy CDL-4.6, in accordance with the Planning Commission recommendation as set forth in the Planning Commission Agenda Report dated May 18, 2022, and by this reference, incorporated herein.

6. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED on this 27"' day of June, 2022.

ATTEST:

Jennifer Crawford, City Clerk
David Avila, Mayor
-463-

ORDINANCE NO.393

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF YUCAIPA, CALIFORNIA AMENDING CHAPTER 7
(SIGN REGULATIONS) OF DIVISION 7 (GENERAL

DESIGN STANDARDS) OF THE DEVELOPMENT CODE

TO AMEND REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO

ELECTRONIC MESSAGING CENTER BILLBOARDS
WHEREAS, on March 14, 1994, the City Council of the City of Yucaipa (the "City Council") adopted a comprehensive Development Code that includes zoning standards and development review procedures for the City of Yucaipa (the "City") to use to evaluate a variety of development and land use proposals; and
WHEREAS, on May 18, 2022, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider amendments to certain sign regulations related to primary signs to consider Electronic Messaging Centers (collectively the "Amendments") and after receiving public comments, closed the public hearing, and recommended that the City Council adopt the proposed Amendments set forth in this Ordinance; and WHEREAS, on June 27, 2022, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed Amendments, at which time a staff report was presented and evidence was provided, as set forth in Attachment A to the City Council Agenda Report to support the finding that the proposed Amendments are consistent with the City's General Plan and policies therein, as required by the Yucaipa Development Code Section 83.020210; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that approval of the proposed Amendments to the Development Code are consistent with the policies and objectives of the General Plan by ensuring the business needs of the community support the City's economic objectives; and WHEREAS, the City Council has made the necessary findings to adopt the Amendments to the Development Code as required by California law and has taken all other actions as required by California law to amend the Development Code, and WHEREAS, the Amendments and proposed electronic messaging center billboard projects and development agreements (collectively the "Project") has been evaluated in Mitigated Negative Declaration, prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), and that the Project will not result in any significant environmental impacts with the incorporation of identified mitigation measures; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the facts presented in the case, including the written and oral staff reports regarding the proposed Amendment (Case Nos. 21-096, 21-104, and 21-154), public testimony, written and oral evidence presented to the Planning Commission and the Planning Commission recommendation.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YUCAIPA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Paragraph 0) of Section 87.0710 (Prohibited Signs) of the Development Code shall be amended to read as follows, with all other provisions of Section 87.0710 remaining in place without amendment:
"o) Permanent primary signs and outdoor advertising structures (billboards) that advertise or identify a business, function, establishment, or product at a location other than the property on which such business or establishment is located or such product is manufactured or sold, except as permitted in Section 87.0725. Such signs may advertise political viewpoints, political campaigns, and other noncommercial messages."
SECTION 2. A new paragraph (c) is hereby added to Section 87.0725 (Primary Signs) of the Development Code to read as follows, with all other portions of Section 87.0725 remaining in effect without amendment:
"(c) Electronic Messaging Center Billboard
(1) General Definitions
(A) For purposes of this section, the following terms shall have the following meanings:
(I) "Billboard" has the same meaning as those advertising displays defined in California Business and Professions Code Section 5202. (II) "Electronic Messaging Center Billboard" means an internally or externally illuminated billboard that utilizes digital message technology capable of instantaneously changing the static message or copy on the sign electronically.
(2) Total Number of Electronic Messaging Center Billboards Permitted; New Billboards Prohibited.

The total number of Electronic Messaging Center Billboards permitted on privately - owned properties within the City shall be three (3). No other Billboards shall be permitted on such properties in the City.
(3) Site Limitations
(A) Electronic Messaging Center Billboards constructed or otherwise located within the City of Yucaipa shall be subject to the following site limitations:
(I) An Electronic Messaging Center Billboard shall be located within 300 feet of either edge of the right of way of California Interstate Highway 10, and within 750 feet of an existing freeway interchange and ramp.
(II) No Electronic Messaging Center Billboard shall be located within 500 feet of any other Billboard or Electronic Messaging Center Billboard located on the same side of the freeway or within 1,000 feet of any other Billboard or Electronic Messaging Center Billboard located on the opposite side of the freeway.
-465-

(4) Review Process
No Electronic Messaging Center Billboard shall be constructed, erected, or operated without first obtaining a conditional use permit pursuant to the procedure, notice and hearing requirements specified in Section 83.030120 of the Yucaipa Development Code, and shall include the following information with the application materials for the Conditional Use Permit:
(A) Flag test for the Electronic Messaging Center Billboard, which shall be conducted according to the following protocol:
(I) A Flag or object no smaller than thirty-two (32) square feet shall be lifted vertically in the location of the proposed Electronic Messaging Center Billboard, starting at a height of twenty-five (25) feet (measured from the bottom of the object).
(II) City personnel shall observe whether the object is visible at a height of twenty-five (25) feet (measured from the bottom of the object). If the object is not visible, it shall be raised in ten -foot (10') increments until it is visible from one (1) direction at a distance of three -tenths (3/10) of one mile from sign location. The height at which the object becomes visible shall establish the maximum height to the bottom of the Electronic Message Center Billboard's display screen. (III) A detailed report shall be presented to City personnel documenting with photos, dimensions and text of the observations of the Flag test.
(5) Design and Performance Requirements
Any Electronic Messaging Center Billboard approved within the City shall be subject to the following design and performance requirements:
(A) Electronic Messaging Center billboards shall comply with all applicable location, distance, size, operational, permit or licensing, and/or other requirements or limits imposed by Federal, State or local law, including, without limitation, the California Outdoor Advertising Act, California Business and Professions Code Section 5200 et seq., and its implementing regulations, including applicable amendments thereto. To the extent a conflict arises between any provisions of this section and applicable Federal, State or local law, unless otherwise preempted, local law shall control. (B) The permitted height of an Electronic Message Center Billboard shall be determined through the Conditional Use Permit Review process and shall be limited to the maximum height necessary to ensure adequate visibility of the display from Interstate 10 as established through the Flag Test set forth in paragraph (c)(4)(A) of this Section, however in no event shall an Electronic Message Center Billboard exceed 75 feet in height, as measured from lowest finished grade adjacent to any portion of the base of the structure to the top of the billboard structure.
(C) The maximum intensity of light output produced by an Electronic Messaging Center Billboard display shall not exceed 0.3 foot-candles above the ambient light level at any time, as measured using a foot-candle meter at a distance of 250 feet, and shall otherwise comply with section 5403(g) of the Outdoor Advertising Act and section 21466.5 of the California Vehicle Code.

Automatic dimmers shall be installed and operational on all Electronic Messaging Center Billboards to adjust the light output in accordance with the above standards.
(D) Electronic Messaging Center Billboards displays shall contain still or static messages or images only, and no part of the sign structure or image being displayed may move or present the appearance or optical illusion of movement, or include flashing, blinking, or traveling lighting, the varying of light intensity, or any other means not providing constant illumination. Each static message or image shall be displayed for a minimum of eight (8) consecutive seconds before changing, and the transition or blank screen time between one display message and the next shall not exceed one second. (E) An Electronic Messaging Center Billboard shall have no more than two (2) display screen faces and each display screen shall be oriented primarily for viewing from Interstate 10, and directed away from any residentially zoned property to the maximum extent feasible.
(F) The area of each Electronic Messaging Center Billboard display screen face, including framing and trim for the screen, shall not exceed 680 square feet, with maximum dimensions of any display screen not exceeding 50 feet wide by 20 feet high.
(G) An Electronic Messaging Center Billboard shall feature a decorative base structure approved by City. Structures design elements may include the use of the City of Yucaipa logo, and community motifs that enhance design of the Electronic Message Center Billboard structure, and shall incorporate a top and base treatment to the Electronic Message Center Billboard structure. (H) Electronic Messaging Center Billboard owners and/or operators shall make space available for the display of emergency messaging in accordance with local, regional, and/or State protocols."
SECTION 3. Ordinance No. 393, in conjunction with the other components of the proposed Electronic Messaging Center Billboard Project was described and evaluated in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), resulting in the preparation of a Recirculated Mitigated Negative Declaration (RMND) to determine the level of environmental impacts associated with the Project that could result in the development of new Electronic Messaging Centers within the City of Yucaipa. Based on the analysis contained in the RMND and other evidence in the record, the City Council, exercising its independent judgment, hereby finds that the project will not have a significant environmental impact with the adoption of the identified mitigation measures, adopts the RMND, and adopts the attached Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). The documents and other materials constituting the record of proceedings are located at the Planning Offices at Yucaipa City Hall, 34272 Yucaipa Boulevard, Yucaipa, California 92399 SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE
This ordinance shall take effect and be enforced thirty (30) days following its adoption.

SECTION 5. NOTICE OF ADOPTION
The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and shall publish a summary of this ordinance and post a certified copy of the full ordinance in the office of the City Clerk at -467-

least five (5) days prior to the adoption of the proposed ordinance; and within fifteen (15) days after adoption of the ordinance, the City Clerk shall publish a summary of the ordinance with the names of the council members voting for and against the ordinance: "Ordinance No. 393 amends the City's Sign Code to provide regulations for Electronic Messaging Center Billboards."
ADOPTED by the City Council and signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk this 27th day of June, 2022.

ATTEST:

Jennifer Crawford, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

David M. Snow, City Attorney
David Avila, Mayor
W.:

General Outdoor Advertising Page 1
Case No. 21-096/GPA/DCA/DA/CUP
Conditions of Approval; 6-27-22

CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
ON -GOING CONDITIONS/GENERAL REQUIREMENTS:

PLANNING DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 224

1. This Conditional Use Permit and Development Agreement is for the establishment of an Electronic Messaging Center Billboard on an existing commercial property located at 13500 Calimesa Boulevard. APN: 0318-212-19.

Any alteration or expansion of these facilities, or increase in the developed area of the site from that shown on the approved site plan, may require the submission of a new application or an additional application for Revisions for review and approval.

2. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action or proceeding attacking or seeking to set aside, void or annul the approval of all or part of the matters applied for, or any other claim, action or proceeding relating to or arising out of such approval. This obligation includes the obligation to reimburse the City, its agents, officers and employees for any court costs or attorney fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees are required by a court to pay as a result of such claim, action or proceeding. The City agrees to notify the applicant of any such claim, action or proceeding promptly after the City becomes aware of it.

The City may participate in the defense of the claim, action or proceeding, but such participation will not relieve the applicant of applicant's defense and indemnification obligations, including City expenses.

3. This Conditional Use Permit shall become null and void if all conditions have not been complied with and the occupancy or use of the land has not taken place within three (3) years of the date of approval. One extension of time, not to exceed three (3) years, may be granted upon written request and submittal of the appropriate fee not less than 30 days prior to the date of expiration. PLEASE NOTE: this will be the only notice given for the above specified expiration date.

The applicant is responsible for the initiation of an extension request.

4. The applicant/owner shall pay a fee of $2,548.00, pursuant to Senate Bill 1535.

This fee shall be submitted to the Planning Division within three (3) days after the effective date of conditional approval along with a $50.00 administrative handling fee required by the Clerk. Payments shall be made with a Check, Money Order or Cashier's Check for $2,598.00 made payable to the "Clerk of the Board". The Planning Division shall then file the Notice of Determination within three (3) days after the effective date of conditional approval. The applicant should be aware that Section 21089(b) of the Public Resources Code provides m

General Outdoor Advertising
Case No. 21-096/GPA/DCA/DA/CUP
Conditions of Approval; 6-27-22

Page 2 ends

that any project approved under CEQA is not operative, vested or final until the required fee is paid. Proof of fee payment will be required prior to issuance of building permits. A prorated share of the CEQA fee may be shared between other applications for Electronic Messaging Center Billboards approved at the same meeting.

5. All conditions of this Conditional Use Permit and Development Agreement are continuing conditions. Failure of the applicant and/or operator to comply with any or all of said conditions at any time may result in the revocation of the permit granted to use the property.

6. The applicant/owner shall maintain their site in good condition at all times.

7. All new utility lines shall be placed underground.

8. The applicant shall implement the approved "Solid Waste Recycling Plan" for any new commercial, industrial, or institutional uses located on the property. The developer and all occupants of the property shall make a good faith effort to fully comply with each component of the approved Plan. Any proposed revision to this Plan shall be subject to the review and approval of Yucaipa Disposal, Inc. (909) 797-9125.

9. Developers of commercial/industrial/institutional projects shall attempt to ensure that at least 20% of the total cost of the project shall be spent with Yucaipa businesses and/or the hiring of Yucaipa residents.

10. The project site shall remain in full compliance with all City Sign Regulations at all times.

11. The applicant/property owner shall be required to apply an anti -graffiti coating, and/or provide a landscape design of a type and nature that is acceptable to the City Planner, to each of the publicly viewable surfaces deemed by the City Planner to be likely to attract graffiti.

12. The applicant/property owner, and any and all successors in interest, shall for ten (10) years after the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, provide the City with sufficient matching paint and/or anti -graffiti coating on demand for use in the painting over or removal of graffiti from any designated graffiti attracting surfaces.

13. The project shall implement the mitigation measures listed in the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

14. The Project shall maintain compliance with the Development Agreement.

ENGINEERING DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 228
-470-

General Outdoor Advertising
Case No. 21-096/GPA/DCA/DA/CUP
Conditions of Approval; 6-27-22

Page 3 ends

15. Developer shall ensure sign location allows for adequate sight distance per City Standards 175 and 176.

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT:

BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 225

16. The sign structure shall comply with all structural and non structural provisions of the California Building Code.

17. The sign shall comply with the California Electrical Code.

ENGINEERING DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 228

18. Developer shall ensure sign location allows for adequate sight distance per City Standards 175 and 176.

PLANNING DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 224

19. Verification of application for sign registration and plot plan approval by the Planning Division must be submitted prior to the issuance of a building permit for the installation, wiring, remodeling or reconstruction of any sign or portion thereof which requires a building permit.

20. If applicable, the applicant shall submit a "Solid Waste Recycling Plan" for review and approval. This Plan shall address two (2) principal recycling programs: 1) the recycling of construction waste/debris during the demolition and/or development phase of the project, and 2) the recycling of the solid waste that is generated daily by each proposed use during the operational phase of the project. The construction waste component shall include: complete information on the individual or firm that will be responsible for implementing the recycling plan; complete information on all proposed recycling facilities that will receive waste products; and estimates of the volume or weight of each type of material that will be recycled. The operational waste component shall include: complete information on the location, access, sizes, and numbers of solid waste and recycling bins needed to serve each proposed use that is located within the project. For information on the types of waste disposal services that are available, you may contact Yucaipa Disposal, Inc. at (909) 797-9125 for assistance.

21. Proof of fee payment of Fish and Game fees and/or County Administrative handling fees pursuant to California State Assembly Bill 3158 shall be submitted.

22. Sign elevations shall be consistent with those approved by the City Council. -471-

General Outdoor Advertising
Case No. 21-096/GPA/DCA/DA/CUP
Conditions of Approval; 6-27-22

Page 4 ends

23. The applicant/property owner shall grant to the City, in writing, the irrevocable right of entry over, and access to, such property, upon twenty-four (24) hours' posted notice, by authorized City employees or agents, for the purpose of removing or painting over graffiti on any designated graffiti attracting surfaces.

24. The project shall implement the mitigation measures listed in the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

SUBJECT PROPERTY SHALL NOT BE OCCUPIED AND/OR USED FOR

PURPOSES APPLIED FOR UNTIL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS
HAVE BEEN MET:

BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 225

25. The sign structure shall comply with all structural and non structural provisions of the California Building Code.

26. The sign shall comply with the California Electrical Code.

PLANNING DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 224

27. Parking and on -site circulation requirements shall be provided for as identified on the approved site plan.

28. The project shall implement the mitigation measures listed in the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
-472-

Leonard and Company Page 1
Case No. 21-104/GPA/DCA/DA/CUP
Conditions of Approval; 6-27-22

CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
ON -GOING CONDITIONS/GENERAL REQUIREMENTS:

PLANNING DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 224

1. This Conditional Use Permit and Development Agreement is for the establishment of an Electronic Messaging Center Billboard that will replace an existing static billboard located on an existing commercial property at 31103 Outer Highway, APN: 0300-101-19. Any alteration or expansion of these facilities, or increase in the developed area of the site from that shown on the approved site plan, may require the submission of a new application or an additional application for Revisions for review and approval.

3. This Conditional Use Permit shall become null and void if all conditions have not been complied with and the occupancy or use of the land has not taken place within three (3) years of the date of approval. One extension of time, not to exceed three (3) years, may be granted upon written request and submittal of the appropriate fee not less than 30 days prior to the date of expiration. PLEASE NOTE: this will be the on►y notice given for the above specified expiration date.

The applicant is responsible for the initiation of an extension request.

4. The applicant/owner shall pay a fee of $2,548.00, pursuant to Senate Bill 1535.

Leonard and Company
Case No. 21-104/GPA/DCA/DA/CUP
Conditions of Approval; 6-27-22

Page 2 ends

6. The applicant/owner shall maintain their site in good condition at all times.

7. All new utility lines shall be placed underground.

10. The project site shall remain in full compliance with all City Sign Regulations at all times.

13. The project shall implement the mitigation measures listed in the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

14. The Project shall maintain compliance with the Development Agreement.

ENGINEERING DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 228
-474-

Leonard and Company Page 3
Case No. 21-104/GPA/DCA/DA/CUP
Conditions of Approval; 6-27-22

15. Developer shall ensure sign location allows for adequate sight distance per City Standards 175 and 176.

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT:

BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 225

16. The sign structure shall comply with all structural and non structural provisions of the California Building Code.

17. The sign shall comply with the California Electrical Code.

ENGINEERING DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 228

18. Developer shall ensure sign location allows for adequate sight distance per City Standards 175 and 176.

PLANNING DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 224

21. Proof of fee payment of Fish and Game fees and/or County Administrative handling fees pursuant to California State Assembly Bill 3158 shall be submitted.

22. Sign elevations shall be consistent with those approved by the City Council. -475-

Leonard and Company
Case No. 21-104/GPA/DCA/DA/CUP
Conditions of Approval; 6-27-22

Page 4 ends

24. The project shall implement the mitigation measures listed in the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

SUBJECT PROPERTY SHALL NOT BE OCCUPIED AND/OR USED FOR

PURPOSES APPLIED FOR UNTIL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS
HAVE BEEN MET:

BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 225

25. The sign structure shall comply with all structural and non structural provisions of the California Building Code.

26. The sign shall comply with the California Electrical Code.

PLANNING DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 224

27. Parking and on -site circulation requirements shall be provided for as identified on the approved site plan.

28. The project shall implement the mitigation measures listed in the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
-476-

General Outdoor Advertising Page 1
Case No. 21-154/GPA/DCA/DA/CUP
Conditions of Approval; 6-27-22

CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
ON -GOING CONDITIONS/GENERAL REQUIREMENTS:

PLANNING DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 224

1. This Conditional Use Permit and Development Agreement is for the establishment of an Electronic Messaging Center Billboard that will replace an existing static billboard on an existing commercial property located at 31547 Outer Highway 10, APN: 0300-161-13. Any alteration or expansion of these facilities, or increase in the developed area of the site from that shown on the approved site plan, may require the submission of a new application or an additional application for Revisions for review and approval.

The applicant is responsible for the initiation of an extension request.

4. The applicant/owner shall pay a fee of $2,548.00, pursuant to Senate Bill 1535.

General Outdoor Advertising
Case No. 21-154/GPA/DCA/DA/CUP
Conditions of Approval; 6-27-22

Page 2 ends

6. The applicant/owner shall maintain their site in good condition at all times.

7. All new utility lines shall be placed underground.

10. The project site shall remain in full compliance with all City Sign Regulations at all times.

13. The project shall implement the mitigation measures listed in the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

14. The Project shall maintain compliance with the Development Agreement.

ENGINEERING DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 228

General Outdoor Advertising Page 3
Case No. 21-154/GPA/DCA/DA/CUP
Conditions of Approval; 6-27-22

15. Developer shall ensure sign location allows for adequate sight distance per City Standards 175 and 176.

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT:

BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 225

16. The sign structure shall comply with all structural and non structural provisions of the California Building Code.

17. The sign shall comply with the California Electrical Code.

ENGINEERING DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 228

18. Developer shall ensure sign location allows for adequate sight distance per City Standards 175 and 176.

PLANNING DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 224

21. Proof of fee payment of Fish and Game fees and/or County Administrative handling fees pursuant to California State Assembly Bill 3158 shall be submitted.

22. Sign elevations shall be consistent with those approved by the City Council. -479-

General Outdoor Advertising
Case No. 21-154/GPA/DCA/DA/CUP
Conditions of Approval; 6-27-22

Page 4 ends

24. The project shall implement the mitigation measures listed in the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

SUBJECT PROPERTY SHALL NOT BE OCCUPIED AND/OR USED FOR

PURPOSES APPLIED FOR UNTIL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS
HAVE BEEN MET:

BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 225

25. The sign structure shall comply with all structural and non structural provisions of the California Building Code.

26. The sign shall comply with the California Electrical Code.

PLANNING DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 224

27. Parking and on -site circulation requirements shall be provided for as identified on the approved site plan.

28. The project shall implement the mitigation measures listed in the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

E:1

From:

Public Comment
To:

Benjamin Matlock
Subject:

FW: Planning Commission
Date:

Monday, May 23, 2022 10:21:14 AM
Attachments:

COYSECONDARY3 7916fdb3-bec5-493a-b982-1609ace2deba.ono
CE Journal 3331-8914-1-PB.odf
adverts-d l.la-literature-review.odf
CEOA Handbook 2021.odf
D&NE070403f. odf
Just making sure that you received this email? It was delivered to the public comment inbox City of Yucaipa
• , CA
Office:
ivwvw.yucaipa.org
From: Amanda Frye
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2022 9:22 AM
To: Public Comment
Cc: Sentinel Sbc ; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Planning Commission
Re: Agenda-3. SUBJECT: Electronic Messaging Centers
Dear Honorable Planning Commissioners and Yucaipa Planning and City Staff:

Please remove agenda item 3. Electronic Messaging Centers from the 5/18/2022 consent agenda as public comments and discussion on this item are required to be heard based on California Code. There are serious safety concerns, liability and CEQA issues involved in the Electronic Messaging Center signs especially with proposed sign placement along Outer Highway in view of I-10 freeway.

1. The placement of the signs on Outer Highway produce a major liability for the city of Yucaipa, the sign owners and property owners. Attached are several journal articles which discuss the safety hazards of electronic billboard signs especially along major roadways. These electronic billboards have been demonstrated to distract drivers plus the glare in along the freeway makes driving this stretch around Yucaipa even more dangerous and difficult. Placement of electronic billboards along Outer Highway increases the safety hazards on the adjacent Federal Interstate 10 (I-10) Freeway. Everyday there are multiple emergency responses to accidents along the stretch of the 1-10 freeway along the stretch of freeway around Yucaipa especially the steep grade around and near the Yucaipa Blvd exit. The large number of slow trucks in the East bound lanes and the downhill grade of the West bound lanes create safety issues with cars. Distracted drives with glaring electronic billboards only add this hazard. I drive this stretch of the I-10 freeway frequently the slowed semi -trucks and highway grade with the lane changes and off ramp already make this stretch of the 1-10 freeway dangerous. We constantly hear emergency response vehicles attending to accidents along this section of the I-10 corridor.

2. There are probably CEQA violations from placement of electronic billboards in Rural Residential, Agricultural, Historic and Residential Agricultural making the approval of these electronic billboards a liability. A CEQA negative declaration is not appropriate for this project.

3. The impact on area wildlife also needs to be evaluated. As these electronic billboard and glare impact nocturnal i•

wildlife in this wildlife corridor area.

4. There are residents that are directly impacted by the glare from these electronic billboards. Would this be considered harassment? The area is rural residential and these electronic billboards are not appropriate for this zoning.

5. The placement of electronic billboard should require an Environmental Impact Report done for each sign placement.

I am a neighboring resident and do most of my shopping in Yucaipa contributing tax dollars to the Yucaipa community. While I believe Yucaipa has done a good job with the Cultural Music and Art Center, Festivals and Dovoltwwri planning and park systems, this electronic billboard element is NOT appropriate especially for the locations along Outer Highway and the I-10 freeway. Yucaipa would be creating a liability by allowing electronic billboard signs along this already dangerous stretch of freeway. CEQA requirements have not been met and there should be an environmental impact study conducted for each of the sign placements. Many residents would be hammed and property values decreased negatively impacting San Bernardino County too.

Sincerely,
Am n F e
Enclosures: Four attachments
i•

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
CEDR Transnational Road Research Programme
Call 2016 Safety
CEDR
Conference Europeenne
des Directeurs des Routes
Funded by Belgium -Flanders, Ireland, Conference of European Netherlands, Slovenia, Sweden, United Kingdom Directors of Roads NVAssessing Distraction of Vehicle drivers in Europe from E Roadside Technology -based Signage.
safety effects of (digital) roadside advertising:
an overview of the literature
Deliverable No: D1.1a
Date: 17 May 2018
Partners
SWOV Institute for Road Safety Research, Netherlands
Transport Research Laboratory, United Kingdom
Vias institute, Belgium
S Ulnv 1 z L I'll`
.o,...:.........« irstitu:e
- cE R!
0 CEOR
Co,W,ance Europeenne
des Directeurs des Routes
Conference of European
Directors of Roads
WIM

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
CEDR Call 2016: Safety
E D R
Conference Europeenne
Funded by Belgium -Flanders, Ireland, des Directeursdes Roues Netherlands, Slovenia, Sweden, United Kingdom Conference of European Directors of Roads
Assessing Distraction of Vehicle drivers in Europe from Roadside Technology -based Signage.
'
The safety effects of (digital) roadside advertising:
dI overview
+:r>. y< literature
Start date of project: September 2017
Author(s):

Willem Vlakveld (SWQV)
Shaun Heiman (TRL)
PEB Project Contact:

End date of project: February 2019
Des O'Connor (Transport Infrastructure Ireland)
;,EVERTS
CEDR
Conference Europeenne
des Diracteum des Routes
Conference of European
Directors of Roads

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
Table of contents
Glossaryof Terms...................................................................................................... 4 Summary.................................................................................................................... 6 1 Introduction.......................................................................................................... 8 2 Introducing the concepts of attention and distraction ........................................... 9 2.1 Attention..................................................................................................................9

2.2 Distraction..............................................................................................................10 3 Framework for distraction by roadside advertising ............................................. 13 4 Results of the literature review........................................................................... 16 4.1 Identification and classification of relevant literature...............................................16

4.2 Studies on crash risk..............................................................................................17

4.3 Studies on gaze behaviour.....................................................................................19

4.4 Studies on driving behaviour..................................................................................24

4.5 Studies on situation awareness..............................................................................27

4.6 Other studies and overview studies........................................................................27 5 Findings structured within the SEEV-framework................................................ 30 5.1 Salience.................................................................................................................30

5.2 Effort......................................................................................................................31

5.3 Expectations..........................................................................................................32

5.4 Value......................................................................................................................33

5.5 Luminance.............................................................................................................33 6 Overall conclusions............................................................................................ 34 References............................................................................................................... 36 3
CE_DR
Conference Euro
�- des Direcleurs des Routes
Conference of European
Directors of Roads
-485-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
Glossary of Terms
Attention
Orientation to sensory events; detection of objects or event for cognitive processing, and the maintenance of a vigilant state.

Billboard
Surface that displays an advertisement.

Distraction
A diversion of attention away from activities critical for safe driving toward a competing activity.

Dwell time
Total amount of time the driver fixates at an object (e.g. a billboard) when the driver passes this object.

LED -screen
Surface composed out of Light Emitting Diodes (LED). These screens emit light and on these screens advertisements can be displayed. These advertisements can be displayed for a given period of time and then digitally be replaced by another (static digital billboards). These billboards can also display advertisements with moving images (video billboards).

Fixation
Period of time the visual gaze is on a single location.

Roadside advertising
All kinds of visible expressions road users can see that promote a product, event or activity.

Static digital billboard
One light emitting screen or a light emitting screen composed out of various screens that displays a static advertisement (i.e. an advertisement in which nothing moves). This static advertisement is digitally replaced by another static advertisement after it has been displayed for a given time.

SPI
Safety Performance Indicator: data -based parameter used for monitoring and assessing safety performance. Crashes are rare events and the stretches of road a billboard may cause a crash are small. Therefore, the impact of billboards on crash rates is not known most of the times. 4 CEDR
x' p
Conference Europi-no
des Oirecteurs des Routes
Conference of European
Directore of Roads
-486-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
However, it is possible to measure driver behaviour in the vicinity of billboards, for instance gaze behaviour. When drivers look for an extended period of time at an external object, the crash risk increases (Dingus et al., 2016). Because there is a relationship between crash risk and gaze behaviour, gaze behaviour is a SPI.

Traditional static billboard
Billboard that displays one advertisement continuously. An old advertisement has to be removed and new advertisement put up manually. Traditional static billboards can be illuminated.

Video billboard
A light emitting screen or a light emitting screen composed out of various screens that displays videos or moving animations.

Visual clutter
Disturbance of visual attention that is required for the driving task (e.g. looking at road signs) due the visual attraction of billboards.

E 5 p� CEDR
Co,N.,o co Umpeenne
tles Di--teun; tles Routes
Conference of European
Directors of Roads
-487-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
Summary
Roadside advertising is, by its nature, designed to capture the attention of road users. Because humans have limited attentional resources it is therefore possible that such advertisements could hamper the safe execution of the driving task. The aim of this systematic literature review is to summarise findings from existing research on the impact of roadside advertisements on distraction and road safety (with a specific focus on digital advertisements).

An adapted version of the SEEV (Salience, Effort, Expectancy, Value) framework about visual attention of road users (Horrey, Wickens, & Consalus, 2006) was used to structure the findings.

The factor of 'Luminance' was added to the SEEV-framework and the existing factor of 'Value' was expanded. These changes were made, respectively, to ensure that the issues of glare and billboard content were considered along with salience, the effort required from drivers, and the impact of expectancy.

Fifty studies were identified about the effects of roadside advertisements on crash risk or road user behaviour. Forty-nine of these studies were about drivers and one was about motorcyclists.

Five studies examining the association between crashes and roadside advertisements were found, although the findings do not allow firm conclusions to be drawn. In one study an increase in the number of crashes was found near billboards and in the four other studies no change was detected. However, the literature suffers from at least two limitations. One issue is that existing studies may lack statistical power. Because crashes are rare events and the stretches of road on which a billboard could contribute to a crash are short, the included numbers of crashes in such studies are mostly small, and therefore require many observations to detect any changes.

Another issue is research design. Three of the five studies were before -and -after -studies (the crash rate before the placement of billboards and the crash rate after) and in two studies a comparison site was also included. A before -and -after -study with a comparison site is a stronger research design than a before -and -after -study without such a group. There were two before -and - after -studies with what appeared to be sufficient statistical power and a comparison site. In one of them an increase of crashes near digital billboards was found and in the other no difference was found.

Approximately half of drivers do not look at billboards when they pass them. However, drivers look more often and for longer at so called static digital billboards that display various static advertisements in sequence, when compared with traditional static billboards. The moments during which advertisements switch seem to be particularly distracting. Video billboards (digital billboards that display constantly moving images) attract the most attention. Drivers more often look at billboards at street level than at raised level but when they look at billboards at raised level they tend to look for longer. Young novice drivers are inclined to look at static digital billboards and video billboards the most. Although drivers rarely look for more than two seconds at a billboard, they sometimes do, especially when it is a static digital billboard or a video billboard.

Given that there is strong evidence that long glances at objects outside the vehicle (and away from the road) increase crash risk substantially, this finding may be a cause for concern.

There is quite strong evidence that lane keeping deteriorates when drivers look at billboards.

Billboards do not seem to have a strong impact on speed. In some studies, headways were found Na
CEDR
Conference Europeenne
des Dicecteum des Routes
Conference of European
Directors of Roads
EM

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
to get shorter, in particular when drivers pass static digital billboards and video billboards. This may be dangerous because response latencies are longer when drivers look at billboards, and shorter headways mean that safety margins may be decreased even further. Drivers also more often overlook road signs and tend to forget to signal when they change lanes near billboards.

The content of what is displayed on billboards does not seem to influence driving behaviour very much. What is displayed on the advertisements (arousing pictures and texts) influences decision making and driving performance only slightly. However, more research is needed to assess the effect of emotion -laden pictures and text on driving behaviour.

The less demanding the driving task is, the more drivers let their eyes wander to task -irrelevant objects. It seems that most drivers are able to regulate adequately the attentional resources the driving task requires. However, in traffic the task demands can suddenly increase and critical events (e.g. a lead vehicle that suddenly brakes) may not always be properly anticipated. In those circumstances looking at billboards could have detrimental effects on safety.

In most field studies no difference was found in gaze behaviour at illuminated billboards during day and night. This does not mean that such billboards do not have an impact on driving at night.

Most jurisdictions regulate the amount of light billboards are allowed to emit. The illuminated billboards drivers passed at night in these field studies most probably were in compliance with these regulations. Illuminated billboards definitely can cause glare. In one simulator study it was found that the more light a digital billboard emitted the longer were driver response latencies to acute road hazards.
q� CEDR
�y Conference Europ¢anne
�a des Directeurs des Routes
Co ofetence of European
Oirectnrs of Roads
E: •

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
Introduction
Roadside advertising is intended to capture the attention of road users. Most of the time these advertisements are billboards that road users can see while they drive, ride, or walk on public roads, and that promote a product, event or activity. It could be that due to particular features of these billboards (e.g. size, moving images, luminance, content, etcetera) they capture so much attention of road users that they impede the safe execution of the traffic task. If so, they can contribute to the occurrence of road crashes.

ADVERTS is a research project that aims to compile recommendations for minimising distraction from roadside billboards - with a special focus on static digital billboards and video billboard - so that they do not interrupt the safe execution of the driving task. The current report forms the theoretical basis of these recommendations. It describes what has been reported in the scientific literature about the distraction of road side advertising devices and their effects on road safety. The parallel analysis of existing guidelines or regulations in European countries and the future trends in roadside advertising (Boets, Vandemeulebroek & Daniels, 2018) ensures that the recommendations are optimally aligned to current practices, while taking account of likely developments in roadside advertising techniques.

The current report starts with a brief introduction about the concepts of attention and distraction in relation to the traffic task (Chapter 2). After this introduction, the SEEV-model (Horrey et al., 2006) of visual attention in relation to the driving task is presented (Chapter 3). This model distinguishes several features that help to determine to what extent a roadside billboard is likely to attract attention and, hence, the extent to which it is distracting from the driving task. It functions as a framework for the discussion of the studies about particular features of roadside advertising devices and their effects on road safety (Chapter 4). Subsequently, the main findings from the literature are summarised and structured in the theoretical SEEV-model (Chapter 5).

Finally, the report presents the overall conclusions about the effect of roadside advertising on road safety (Chapter 6).
"ka
�a CEDR
Conference Europeenne
® tles Directeurs tles Routes
Conference of European
Directors of Roads
I • ,

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
2 Introducing the concepts of attention and distraction

2.1 Attention
Attention is crucial for safe traffic participation. Drivers and other road users have to monitor the developing road and traffic situation constantly. They also have to monitor the status of their own vehicle (e.g.: "Am I driving not too fast?") and they have to monitor their own status (e.g.: "Am I still attentive?"). Besides this they have to take decisions and to execute actions such as steering, operating the pedals, in order to drive safely. All of this requires attention.

How much attention is required depends on the complexity of the road and the traffic situation, the weather conditions, the experience of the driver, the speed at which the driver is traveling, and the task demands of the vehicle (some vehicles are more demanding to drive than others).

For experienced drivers, the basic tasks involved in driving appear to be almost as natural as walking. When experienced drivers drive in a familiar car, on familiar roads in not too dense traffic, the execution of the driving task requires not much attention (e.g. Mader et al., 2009).

Nonetheless, the traffic situation, even in a quiet situation, can change rapidly. Drivers need to spot cues that predict that the traffic situation may develop into a hazardous situation (i.e. one in which the driver needs to take action to avoid a collision) so they can anticipate and avoid such occurrences. This continuously requires at least a basic level of attention.

The assumption is that experienced drivers can drive almost effortlessly, requiring relatively little attention, because they make use of schemata (Norman & Shallice, 1986). Schemata is plural of schema in Greek. At its lowest level a schema is a mental representation of a sequence of well learned actions. They help to perform the appropriate actions when particular circumstances arise. When for instance, a driver approaches an intersection and the traffic light turns red, the schemata for braking will be activated in the brain and will help the driver to perform the sequence of actions without too much mental effort. Low level schemata can be combined in a high level schema. These high level schemata are mental structures that organise our knowledge and enable us to make assumptions about what we perceive. They help us to cope with the world without too much mental effort. Schemata influence our selective behaviour, as we are more likely to notice or react to things that are anticipated by our schemata. The highest level schemata are called 'scripts' (Abelson, 1981; Schank & Abelson, 1977). One such script could be 'the driving along a motorway' script. This script is a conceptual structure of how to behave and what to expect when driving on a motorway. For example, driving at a relatively high speed in the same direction as the other vehicles, and no pedestrians that cross the road, no oncoming vehicles.

Groeger (2000) has described how schemata, and consequently the required attention, could function while driving. Citing theories of attention and the functioning of the brain developed by Posner and Petersen (1990) and by Stuss, Shallice and Picton (1995). Groeger distinguishes between many different aspects or types of attention. He assumes that drivers have to sustain attention, focus attention, share attention, switch attention, and suppress attention for objects and events that are irrelevant, prepare for attention in case of intended actions in the future, and to pay some attention to set a script (e.g. driving along a motorway). The examples given by Groeger are:
— Drivers sustain attention by keeping schemata activated for events that occur only occasionally. This can for instance be a lead vehicle that brakes suddenly. When drivers are 9 �C�E�dD� R
Conferece Europeenne
des Dimct—des Routes
Conference of European
Directors of Roads
-491-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
prepared for this event, by keeping this schema latently activated, they will respond faster than when they are completely surprised by the event.
— When drivers are on a busy stretch of motorway and drive rather fast, they have to focus (concentrate) on what the traffic ahead is doing, e.g. weaving between lanes or braking. — If drivers are talking to, for example, a passenger, they have to share their attention between the driving task and the conversation task.
— Drivers have to monitor the traffic situation ahead, but also the traffic situation behind. They switch their attention from the traffic situation ahead to the traffic situation behind by using the rear-view mirrors.
— When talking to a passenger, drivers have to suppress their inclination to make eye -contact with the passenger as they have to keep their eyes on the road. — All the time drivers are driving on the motorway they have to be prepared to take actions when they see the sign of the required motorway exit. Being prepared to leave the motorway also means that when approaching the exit, drivers have to suppress their inclination to overtake other vehicles.
— When starting to drive on the motorway drivers have to set the 'driving along a motorway' script in order to enable them to select the proper underlying schemata in certain situations.

The key thing to note is that when road users drive, ride or walk, attention is required in very many ways. The overall workload may be relatively low due to the use of schemata, but a subtle disturbance in the interplay between these many types of attention can have adverse effects on the execution of the driving task. It could be that distraction by roadside advertisements can cause such a disturbance.

2.2 Distraction
Because experienced drivers automatically apply elaborated schemata, the driving task does not require much attention when the road and traffic situation is not complex. In these circumstances there is a spare attentional capacity and drivers often let their eyes wander to objects outside the vehicle (Crundall, Van Loon & Underwood, 2006). According to Wickens (2008) everyone has limited attentional resources. Attention can be distributed to more than one task simultaneously, but only when the demands of the tasks involved are low and when the tasks are very different.

For example, experienced drivers can superficially listen to music and drive at the same time, at least when the road and traffic situation is not very complex. However, when listening to music gets too demanding and/or the workload for the driving task increases, these two tasks can no longer be combined. That is to say that due to the secondary task (in this example listening to music) drivers might no longer sufficiently sustain attention, focus attention, share attention, switch attention, suppress attention or prepare attention in the ways required to remain safe. In other words, they are distracted due to the secondary task. Lee, Young and Regan (2008) define driver distraction as:
"A diversion of attention away from activities critical for safe driving toward a competing activity."
Distraction has many different relevant elements that have to be considered (see Table 2.1):
10 CEDy R
'v7 Conference Europeenne
des Direct— des Routes
Conference of European
Directors of Roads
-492-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
— Source: The source of distraction can be an object, such as a billboard, a person, such as a passenger or a pedestrian on the pavement, an event, such as a low flying airplane that is landing, or an activity of the driver, such as mobile phone use while driving. — Location: The source of distraction can be within the driver, for example when the driver is absorbed in thought or is daydreaming. The source can also be inside the vehicle, such as a wasp in the car or crying children in the back, or outside the vehicle, such as a billboard. — Intentionality: The driver might be compelled to pay attention to the source because of its salience, e.g. a very bright external object, or the driver might voluntarily choose to pay attention, such as calling someone with a mobile phone. — Process: Due to distraction, attention for the traffic task can get disturbed, attention can become insufficient because attention is diverted to other activities, or attention can get misallocated within the traffic task.
— Outcome: The outcome of distraction can be described in terms of impaired performance of the driver, such as late responses (e.g. braking and/or swerving) when an acute threatening situation arises, or in terms of impaired mental capabilities of the driver, such as diminished situation awareness, diminished hazard anticipation, and degraded decision making. The outcome can also be described in terms of car performance, such as speed disruptions and poor lane keeping. Finally, the outcome can be an increase in crash rate.

Table 2.1. Elements of distraction (Lee et al., 2008).

Object I
Compelled by
Disturbance
Delayed response
Internal activity (e.g.
daydreaming)
source
of control
Person
I
i
Degraded longitudinal and
Inside vehicle
Driver's
Diversion of
lateral control
choice
attention
Event
Outside vehicle
Diminished situation
Misallocation
awareness
Activity
of attention
Degraded decision making
Increased crash risk
11 �:=VRT �CgE�D R
`l3 Conlerence Europeenne
O des Directeurs des Routes
Contemn ce of Eurepeon
Directors of Roads
-493-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
Furthermore, a distinction is made between visual distraction, such as distraction caused by a digital billboard, auditory distraction, such as a ringing mobile phone, biomechanical distraction, such as manually adjusting the radio volume, and cognitive distraction, such as being lost in thought (Ranney, Mazzae, Garrott, & Goodman, 2000).

In the case of billboards, the source is an object that is located outside the vehicle. We can conceive of billboards attracting the driver's attention by their appearance (i.e. a driver is compelled by the source to look) and of drivers who intentionally choose to look at them, for instance, when a driver is hungry and is searching for a billboard of a restaurant. This shift of attention away from the driving task may result in a delayed response, for instance, late braking when a lead vehicle suddenly brakes, degraded longitudinal and or lateral control, diminished situation awareness, degraded decision making. All these negative influences on the execution of the driving task may result in an increased crash risk. t ; 12C�E�D R
y Conference Europeenne
1 des Directeursdes Routes
Conference of Eumpean
Directors of Roads
-494-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
3 Framework for distraction by roadside advertising
Not all objects attract the same amount of attention. Wickens and colleagues have developed a model that can be used to understand why certain objects are more distracting than others. Their model predicts how observers, for instance drivers, will allocate their visual attention to different areas of interest in their environment (Horrey et al., 2006; Wickens, Helleberg, Goh & Horrey, 2001; Wickens & Horrey, 2008). According to this model, scanning is guided by the influence of four factors: Salience, Effort, Expectancy, and Value (SEEV). — Salience is about being compelled to look for example at billboards because of their appearance. An object has visual salience or conspicuity when it contrasts highly with its background. Size, flashing lights, sudden changes of colours and motions increase visual salience. Large illuminated digital billboards in the dark with changing colours and moving images are more salient than small traditional static billboards that are not illuminated.

Salience is not only visual. Sudden sounds and vibrations can also attract attention. — Effort is an inhibitory component that discourages observers from scanning between two locations that are far apart. When for instance drivers need to turn their head to read an advertisement, they will be less inclined to take notice of that advertisement than when the advertisement is straight ahead. Effort is also related to workload. When drivers have to allocate much attention to the driving task, for instance because the road and traffic situation is complex, they will be less inclined to look at billboards. Furthermore, studies have shown that the breadth of visual scanning tends to decrease when mental workload increases (Crundall, Underwood & Chapman, 2002). This means that billboards that are further away from the forward road will be less likely to be noticed when drivers have to concentrate on the traffic ahead.
— Expectancy is about the tendency of drivers to scan for information that is relevant for the task at hand. For instance, they may search for a signage board that indicates that they have to leave the motorway in order to reach their destination. — Value accounts for the fact that people tend to seek for the information that is most relevant to the tasks they value. For example, when a driver is hungry and is looking for a place to eat, he or she will be more likely to scan for advertisements of restaurants than would otherwise be the case.

Furthermore, the model distinguishes between bottom -up and top -down induced fixations (glances at an object). A fixation induced by visual salience is called bottom -up selection (Itti & Koch, 2001; Parkhurst, Law & Niebur, 2002) and a fixation induced by cognitive salience (e.g. looking in a direction because one is expecting that goal relevant information can be found in that direction) is called top -down selection (Henderson, Brockmole, Castelhano, & Mack, 2007).

Different brain circuits are probably active when a fixation is induced top -down and when a fixation is induced bottom -up (Hahn, Ross & Stein, 2006). For example, drivers might simply have their attention captured by a billboard because of its visual salience, and not be able to help themselves looking. Otherwise, drivers might deliberately scan for information if they are looking for a petrol station (Henderson et al., 2007). Salience and Effort are bottom -up processes of visual attention and Expectancy and Value are top -down processes of visual attention. Figure 2.1 illustrates this.
13`
CEDR
Conl6mnce Europeenne
des Oimcteurs des Routes
Canference of European
Oirectore of Roads
-495-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
Expectancy
■ Attention allocation to sources
of higher task -relevant
information bandwidth
(event rate)
Value
■ Attention allocation to sources
of more value information to
the task (higher and lower
value)
Visual Attention
Allocation
Salience
Effort
■ Attention allocation to events
Attention allocation between
or information with attention
two information sources with
capture, e.g. flashing lights,
the shortest physical distance
bright lights, sudden onset,
or the shortest time to assess
relative contrast, sounds etc.
the information
Figure 2.1 Determinants for visual attention allocation in the SEEV-framework (Source:

Werneke & Vollrath, 2012).

The SEEV-framework explains why road users will be inclined to look at billboards and when.

However, the SEEV-framework does not explain the possible deterioration of the traffic task once the billboard has captured the attention of the road user. Three factors are particularly relevant in this respect.

1. The content of a message on the billboard can arouse the driver or change his/her mood.

It is a well-known fact that emotions can affect the execution of the driving task (e.g.

Mesken, 2006).

2. The text on the billboard can invite drivers to do things that will affect the safe execution of the driving task. A billboard can for instance display the text: "Call us now and win xxx Euro: dial xxxxxxxx". Dialling a number on a mobile phone while driving increases the crash risk substantially (Dingus et al., 2016).

3. (Digital) billboards can be highly illuminated. During hours of darkness high levels of luminance can dazzle drivers, especially older drivers who are known to be more sensitive to glare.

Within the current study we consider the two aspects related to the billboard messages to belong to the SEEV-factor Value. In order to deal with the issue of glare we extended the model with the factor Luminance.

In summary, factors related to Salience are:
— The presence of moving images or text in advertisements — Other movement such as rotating advertisements
14 A
CEDR
'k_'3P Conference Europeenne
des Directeurs des Routes
C0nference of European
Directors of Roads
I • •

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
— Lighting, colour and contrast with background'
— Exposure time of an advertisement on a static digital billboard — Transition from one advertisement to the other on static digital billboards Factors related to Effort are:
— Position of the advertisement in relation to the forward view of the driver — Size of advertisement
— The visual clutter in the forward view of drivers (e.g. buildings, other billboards, and road signs that surrounds the advertisement)
— Font size of the letters on billboards
— The amount of text on a billboard
— The composition of pictures and text on a billboard
— The traffic density at the spot of the advertisement
— The complexity of the traffic situation at the spot of the billboard.

Factors related to Expectations are:
— Do the advertisements look like road signs?
— Are the advertisements at spots where drivers search for relevant information for the safe execution of the driving task?
— Do the advertisements (partly) block the view on information that is relevant for the safe execution of the driving task?
— Does a billboard refer to information that will be on a next billboard along the road? For example "See our next billboard along this road what we can offer you..." Factors related to Value are:
— Content of message, pictures and or texts that may evoke emotions — Content related to current goals of the driver (for example food, drink) — Text that encourage drivers to engage in distracting activities (e.g. using their mobile phone).

Factors related to Luminance that are not related to salience:
— Does the illuminated billboard/object cause glare?
— Does the brightness of the illuminated billboard make unilluminated road signs almost invisible?
The five categories of this extended SEEV-framework and the factors within each category will be used as a framework for reviewing the literature (see Chapter 5). 'The luminance of a billboard determines how salient the billboard is. Bright billboards in the dark attract attention but they can also cause glare. Glare caused by luminance is not a factor of salience. 15 CEDR
Conference Europeenn,
// des Directeurs des Routes
Conference of European
Directors of Roads
-497-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
4 Results of the literature review

4.1 Identification and classification of relevant literature By means of a systematic literature search we aimed to identify the studies that specifically looked into the effect of roadside advertising on road safety. The following queries and search terms were applied:
(adverti* OR billboard*) AND (driv* OR rid* OR walk*)
OR
(adverti* OR billboard*) AND (disract* OR inatten*)
OR
(adverti* OR billboard*) AND (safety OR traffic OR crash* OR accident*) Databases searched were the SCOPUS database of Elsevier ( https://www.scopus.com) , Google Scholar, and the SWOV-library ( http://Iibrary.swov.nl) . After having deleted the `false positives' (e.g. studies about marketing), 50 studies were identified.

The identified studies appeared to differ substantially with regard to what they measured to assess the effects of roadside advertising. The `final' outcome measure or dependent variable is crash rate; i.e. Are there more crashes at spots where (digital) billboards are present than at similar spots without (digital) billboards? There are only a few studies that looked at the effect of billboards on crash rate. These are discussed in Paragraph 4.2.

Dependent variables can also be a less direct measure, e.g. a Safety Performance Indicator (SPI). SPIs are road user behaviours that are known to contribute to the occurrence of crashes.

Eye glances at billboards and other gaze behaviours are one obvious outcome which are likely to be related to crashes, for example when a driver looks at a billboard she or he cannot at the same time observe the road and traffic situation. Several studies used this measure and they are presented in Paragraph 4.3.

Other SPIs relate to actual road user behaviour and include response times to sudden driving events and longitudinal and lateral vehicle control. Most studies are at this level and are described in Paragraph 4.4.

Some studies focused on the effect of roadside advertising on situation awareness of drivers.

Drivers with good situation awareness permanently know what is going on around them (Gugerty, 1997; Salmon, Stanton, & Young, 2012). These drivers are also good in hazard perception (Horswill & McKenna, 2004). Good situation awareness also means that drivers know that in particular circumstances other road users can be on a collision course but that they are not yet visible because something blocks their view. Paragraph 4.5 describes the results of this type of studies.

Finally, billboards can also influence decision making due to the emotions that are invoked by what is displayed on a billboard. For instance, one can investigate if drivers start to use their 16 CEDR
Conference Europeenne
des Oirecteurs des Routes
Conference of European
Owed —of Roads
-498-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
mobile phone after they have passed an advertisement with a phone number on it. The effects the content of the advertisements have on driving performance are discussed in paragraph 4.4.

Four studies were found in which evaluation studies on the effect of road side advertisement were reviewed (Brijs, Brijs & Cornu, 2014; Decker et al., 2015; Wachtel, 2016; Ziakopoulos, Theofilatos, Papadimitriou & Yannis, 2017). These are discussed in Paragraph 4.6.

4.2 Studies on crash risk
Five studies were found in which crash data were analysed. Three of these studies are published in peer reviewed journals (Izadpanah, Omrani, Koo & Hadayeghi, 2014; Smiley et al., 2005; Yannis, Papadimitriou, Papantoniou & Voulgari, 2013), one is a conference paper (Gitelman, Zaidel & Doveh, 2012), and one is a report by a consultant that conducted the research by order of an interest group of road side advertisers (Tantala & Tantala, 2010). The studies looked at different types of billboards. Billboards can be:
— Traditional static billboards that can be illuminated, e.g. by spotlights (see Figure 4.1).

Figure 4.1 Example of a traditional static billboard.
— Static digital billboards, i.e. billboards that most of the time are composed out of LED screens or are one big LED screen that emit light and that display a static advertisement for some time which is then replaced by another static advertisement (see Figure 4.2). `p 17 CEDR
Conference Europeenne
des Directeurs des Routes
Conference of European
Directors of Roads
-499-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
Figure 4.2 Example of a static digital billboard. The large LED screen emits light but while an advertisement is displayed on the screen for a couple of seconds nothing moves in the advertisement.
— Video billboards, billboards made out of LED screens or one big LED screen on which videos or animations are displayed. Video billboards are as static digital billboards but the displayed advertisements are not static (see Figure 4.3).

Figure 4.3 Example of a video billboard. The boy in the advertisement walks.

Gitelman et al. (2012) and Yannis et al. (2013) do not specify what type of billboards their studies covered. The studies of Smiley et al. (2005), Izadpanah et al. (2014), and Tantala and Tantala (2010) were about static digital billboards. In the study of Tantala and Tantala (2010) the exposure time of a single advertisement on the digital billboards was 10 seconds. In the studies of Izadpanah et al. (2014) and in Smiley et al. (2005) the exposure time of a single advertisement was not specified.

All five studies were before -and -after studies. They all addressed a question of the form `What was the crash rate before billboards were placed along a certain stretch of road and what was the crash rate on that same stretch of road after the placement of billboards?' In order to control for 18 CEDR
Conference codes Rout
ees Directeurs des Routes
Conference of Eumpean
Directors of Roads
-500-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
confounding factors, in three of the studies a comparison stretch of road was included in the analysis (Gitelman et al., 2012; Izadpanah et al., 2014; Smiley et al., 2005).

4.2.1 Conclusions on crash risk
Only the study of Gitelman et al. (2012) found a statistically significant increase of crash rate near billboards. In this study the static billboards along a certain stretch of road were visible during a two year period and then they were covered for a period of one year. After adjusting for traffic volume, the overall crash rate in the period with covered billboards was 60% lower than in the period with visible billboards. For injury crashes (including fatal crashes) this decline was 39% and for property damage only crashes it was 72%. In the four other epidemiological studies no effect on crash rate was found. This means that based on the existing evidence, the effect of billboards on crash rate is inconclusive. On the basis of the results it cannot be concluded that (digital) billboards increase crash risk nor can it be concluded that they have no effect on crash risk at all.

Crashes are rare events. From a societal point of view there are of course far too many, but for statistical analyses there are insufficient crashes when only the crashes in the vicinity of billboards over a limited period of time can be included in the analysis. Long stretches of road were included in the study of Yannis et al. (2013), and the study of Tantala and Tantala (2010) was over a long period of time (88 months). However, these two studies were before -and -after studies without comparison roads. This means that these studies are strong with regard to the number of crashes that were included in the analysis, but weak in controlling for confounding factors that vary with time (Elvik, 2002). The study of Smiley et al. (2005) seems to lack statistical power (small sample size), the four other studies have sufficient statistical power. Of these four studies two had a strong design (before -and -after study with a comparison site). Of these two studies one found an increased crash risks near static digital billboard (Gitelman et al., 2012) and the other not (Izadpanah et al., 2014).

4.3 Studies on gaze behaviour

4.3.1 Gaze behaviour and crash risk in general
A second set of studies looked at the gaze behaviour of drivers. This is a relevant SPI, because there is an association between not looking at the road- and traffic situation, and crash risk. The large scale Naturalistic Driving study "SHRP 2" revealed that the factor "extended glance duration to external object" had a crash Odds Ratio (OR) of 7.1 (95% Confidence Interval (Cl): 4.8-10.4). It also revealed that these extended glance durations to external objects occurred during 0.93% of the driving time observed (the prevalence) (Dingus et al., 2016). An OR of 7.1 can, in this situation, be interpreted as a Relative Risk (RR) of 7.12. meaning that people who demonstrate 2 In many studies the OR is presented and not the RR because it is possible to calculate OR and most of the times it is not possible to calculate RR. However, technically Odds Ratio is not the same as Relative Risk. The odds of an event occurring (in this case a crash) is equal to the probability of the event occurring divided by the probability of it not occurring. Relative risk is a ratio of the probability of an event occurring in the exposed group (crashes of drivers that pass billboards) versus the non -exposed group (crashes of drivers that do not pass billboards). When events are rare, OR and RR are almost the same. Crashes are rare and thus the calculated Odds Ratio can be interpreted as the not calculable Relative Risk. The 95% Confidence Interval (CI) that ranges from 4.8-10.4 means that the best estimate is the OR (interpreted as relative risk) is 7.1 and that it is for 95% certain that the OR will be anywhere between 4.8 and 10.4. 4 19 JA
C� z>�D� R
y+ Conference Europeenne
,r Ces Oirecte dasRoutes
Conference of European
Oimctom of Roads
-501-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
the behaviour are just over seven times as likely to be in a crash as those who do not. In this case it means that when drivers gaze at an object outside the vehicle for a long time, their chance to get involved in a crash is 7.1 times the chance to get involved in a crash when they would have kept their eyes on the road.

Dingus et al. (2016) did not specify what 'extended glances' are. They also did not specify what the external objects were. In one of the background reports about the SHRP 2 study it is stated that a glance before a crash was considered as extended when during the 6 seconds before a crash, the total dwell time on irrelevant objects for safe driving (e.g. the dwell time on a billboard or something inside the vehicle such as a smartphone) was at least 2 seconds (Trent et al., 2015). The OR depends on how much longer than 2 seconds the eyes were not at the forward path of the car and when exactly within the 6 seconds time frame before the crash, the extended glances were made. When for instance the eyes were not at the forward path in the period from 5 to 3 seconds before the crash, the OR was 5.7 and when the eyes were not on the road from 3 seconds to 1 second before the crash, the OR was 13.6 (Trent et al., 2015).

In another Naturalistic Driving study involving only young drivers a slightly different analysis was made (Simons -Morton, Guo, Klauer, Ehsani & Pradhan, 2014). When in the 6 second period before a crash or near crash the driver's eyes were not on the forward path for over 1 second compared with less than 1 second, the OR was 1.7 (95% Cl: 1.3-2.2). When comparing more than 2 seconds with fewer than 2 seconds the OR was 3.8 (95% Cl: 2.6-5.6). The comparison for more than/fewer than 3 seconds, 4 seconds and 5 seconds gave OR values of 6.0 (95% Cl: 3.4-

10.7), 7.2 (95% Cl: 3.3-15.7), and 8.9 (95% Cl: 3.3-24.1) respectively. The results of this study imply that for young and inexperienced drivers even dwell times of just over one second away from the forward path can increase crash risk. Whether this will be the case or not depends of course on the actual road and traffic situation. When the traffic density is low and the situation is not very complex, it is not very likely that a glance of one second away from the forward path will result in a crash. However, in complex traffic situations in dense traffic a glance of just over one second off the road can indeed result in a crash. The study of Simons -Morton et al. (2014) is about young inexperienced drivers only. It could be that glances away from the forward road way of just over one second are less devastating for older and more experienced drivers. However this 'intuitive' notion may not be correct; there is some suggestion that the advantages that more experienced drivers show in safety -critical skills such as hazard perception can, if anything, be even more prone to interference from distraction due to their effortful processing nature (see for example McKenna & Farrand, 1999). Direct research into this topic may be warranted.

4.3.2 Effects of billboards on gaze behaviour
Eleven studies on the impact of billboards on gaze behaviour were found. In all except one (Herrstedt, Greibe, & Andersson, 2013) use was made of a non -intrusive remote eye tracking device. In the study of Herrstedt et al. (2013) the face of the driver and the forward view was filmed simultaneously. Based on these two recordings the researchers assessed whether drivers looked at billboards or not. Of the eleven studies on gaze behaviour, six were field studies (Belyusar, Reimer, Mehler, & Coughlin, 2016; Dukic, Ahlstrom, Patten, Kettwich, & Kircher, 2013; Herrstedt et al., 2013; Herrstedt, Greibe, Andersson & la Cour Lund, 2017; Misokefalou, Papadimitriou, Kopelias & Eliou, 2016; Perez, Bertola, Kennedy & Molino, 2011), four were simulator studies (Chattington, Reed, Basacik, Flint & Parkes, 2009; Garrison & Williams, 2013; 20 C E�D� R
}F Conference Europeenne
des Dicecteurs des Routes
Conference of European
Directors of Roads
-502-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
Meg ias et al., 2011; Stavrinos et al., 2016), and in one study participants watched videos that were filmed from a driver's perspective while their gazes were recorded (Crundall et al., 2006).

Four studies were about static digital billboards only (Belyusar et al., 2016; Dukic et al., 2013; Herrstedt et al., 2017; Perez et al., 2011). In two studies a comparison was made between traditional static billboards and static digital billboards (Chattington et al., 2009; Stavrinos et al., 2016). In the study of Chattington et al. (2009) video billboards were also included. One study was about traditional static billboards only (Garrison & Williams, 2013) and three were about all types of billboards (Crundall et al., 2006; Herrstedt et al., 2013; Misokefalou et al., 2016).

Different types of road were included in the studies. However, most roads were motorways. An exception is the study of Chattington et al. (2009) in which all roads were urban roads.

The field studies:

In the six field studies, participants tended to drive in an instrumented vehicle equipped with a non -intrusive eye tracker. Participants drove a fixed route that took them past several billboards.

The nature of the study was not told to the participants; the research question was essentially `do participants look at billboards and when they do so, how long do they look at them?' Most of the time differences in gaze behaviour between traditional static billboards and static digital billboards were also analysed. None of the field studies included video billboards.

The first field study with an advanced eye tracking system on the open road was conducted by Perez et al. (2011). The authors compared glance behaviour during a road section with no billboards (`control') with glance behaviour on a similar road section with digital billboards and traditional static billboards in two cities. Data were collected during the day and night and across different road types. The authors concluded that the presence of digital billboards was not associated with "unacceptably long glances away from the road". This study was commissioned by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) in the United States, never appeared in a peer reviewed journal, and has been strongly criticized (Wachtel, 2015). The study has many flaws (e.g. low quality eye tracking) and the general conclusion (no unacceptably long glances at digital billboards) was not supported by the results. Participants did in fact gaze more at digital billboards than at traditional static billboards, despite the fact that the digital billboards were smaller in size than the traditional equivalents.

In the first field study of Herrstedt et al. (2013) gaze behaviour at static traditional billboards was analysed. Drivers looked at 69% of the traditional static billboards they passed. 82% of the glances at these billboards lasted less than 1 second. 16% were between 1 second and 2 seconds, and 2% were longer than 2 seconds. However, because no eye tracking equipment was used, the measurement of gazes at billboards was not very accurate. In their second study Herrstedt et al. (2017) made use of advanced eye tracking technology and analysed glance behaviour at digital billboards only. The exposure time, i.e. the time a billboard was in sight of the participant and the participant was able to read what was on that billboard, was approximately 6 seconds. In approximately 60% of all the drive pasts, participants had a quick look at a static digital billboard. In 15% of all the drive pasts the dwell time 2 s or more. Dukic et al. (2013) found that for more than half the billboards, participants did not look at all. However, they more frequently looked at the static digital billboards than at traditional static billboards and road signs.

When they looked, the gazes were also longer at static digital billboards than at traditional static billboards. However, a dwell time of greater than 2 seconds at digital billboards rarely occurred (0.08% of the dwell times at digital billboards). There were no differences in gaze patterns at static digital billboards during day time and during night time. Misokefalou et al. (2016) found that ' 21 cC E R
y Co We oEucopeenne
J tles Directeurs tles Routes
Conference of European
Directors of Roads
-503-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
when drivers looked at advertisements (both traditional static billboards and static digital billboards) this was on average for 0.86 seconds; only 29% of the dwell times on advertisements were over 1 second in duration. Finally, Belyusar et al. (2016) found that although glances of 2 seconds and more rarely occurred (around 1% of the glances), young drivers tended to make more long glances at billboards than older drivers, especially around moments that the advertisement switched at the digital billboard.

The laboratory studies:

Gaze behaviour was analysed in four simulator studies and in one study in which participants watched videos that were filmed from the driver's perspective while their gaze behaviour was recorded. In the four simulator studies gaze behaviour was analysed in combination with driving performance such as lateral position in the lane, speed, steering wheel reversal rate, headway to a lead -vehicle. In this section, only the results of the eye tracking recordings are discussed.

In the study of Chattington et al. (2009) participants drove in an urban area with traditional static billboards and video billboards. Video billboards were digital billboards with constantly moving images on the screen. These video clips lasted around 6 seconds, and were played on repeat.

Billboards (both the traditional static billboards and the video billboards) could appear on the left side, the right side, or straight ahead of the driver (e.g. on top of a gantry). All billboards were placed around three to four meters above street level. Billboards at street level such as advertisements on bus stops were not included. Some billboards could already be seen from far away. These were billboards with a long exposure duration of 6 seconds and more. Due to buildings and curves some were visible for around 4 seconds (intermediate exposure duration), and some were only visible for around 2 seconds (short exposure duration). Overall, drivers looked at video billboards for 12% longer than they did at static billboards, and on average made 34% more glances to video billboards. The findings were also dependent on the advert exposure duration. When drivers looked at a billboard, they looked equally long at a traditional static billboard and a video dynamic digital billboard when the exposure duration was long. When the exposure time was intermediate, they glanced longer at dynamic digital billboards than at static billboards. When the exposure time was short there was again no difference in glance duration between the two. Participants also looked more often and for longer at billboards of both types when they were straight ahead than they were placed on the left and the right side of the road.

In the simulator study of Garrison and Williams (2013), drivers encountered possible hazards (e.g. a pedestrian who due to the circumstances could cross the road without paying attention), passed traditional static billboards and passed traffic signs. They did this in two conditions. In the baseline condition they just drove without any secondary task and in the experimental condition they had a conversation with a passenger while they drove. The hypothesis was that in the experimental condition (talking with a passenger) drivers would concentrate on hazards and important road signs at the expense of looking at billboards. The results only partly supported this hypothesis. The mean number of fixations on the three categories (hazards, signs, and billboards) were lower in the distracted condition (talking with a passenger) than in the baseline condition, but there were no interaction effects. This implies that hazards, signs and billboards all received fewer fixations in the distracted condition. However, with regard to dwell time (the total gaze duration), an interaction effect was found. Dwell times were shorter in all three categories in the distracted condition but significantly more so for billboards and signs than for hazards. So when participants gazed at billboards while distracted, their total gaze duration at the billboards was significantly shorter than when not distracted, whereas when they gazed at hazards while �T S, 22
CEDR
k Conference Eucopeenne
des fir teurs des Routes
Conference of Eurepean
Directors of Roads
-504-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
distracted, the total gaze duration at those hazards was the same as when not distracted. This suggests that drivers were able to moderate their distraction for non -driving -critical targets, at least to some degree.

In the simulator study of Stavrinos et al. (2016) teenage drivers (16-19 year old), middle-aged adults (35-55 year old), and older drivers (65 and older) drove past traditional static billboards and static digital billboards. When a participant was in the direct vicinity of a static digital billboard, the advertisement on the billboard switched automatically. Glances of at least 2 seconds were very rare on both traditional static billboards and digital static billboards, but not for the youngest age group. The differences between static traditional billboards and static digital billboards were small.

However, dwell time increased for teenage drivers and middle-aged adult drivers when the transition from one advertisement to the next on the static digital billboards was slow.

Finally, Crundall et al. (2006) investigated the influence the location of the billboard has on gaze behaviour. In their laboratory study participants watched video clips that were filmed from the perspective of a driver, while their eye glances were recorded. In these clips some of the advertisements were placed at street -level (e.g. on bus shelters) and some were placed at raised - level (around 3m above the ground). Drivers' eyes are most of the times directed towards the forward road view and within that view at the focus of expansion. The focus of expansion (FoE) is the fixed centre in optical flow when moving forward. From the FoE drivers scan more broadly horizontally than vertically (Underwood, Chapman, Brocklehurst, Underwood & Crundall, 2003) (see Figure 4.4).

Figure 4.4 Focus of Expansion (FoE) and area where drivers fixate the most (the size of the ellipse is indicative). The closer to the centre, the more fixations are made. However, drivers tend to scan more broadly along the x-axis of this centre than along the y-axis of this centre.

Because drivers scan more broadly horizontally than vertically it was expected that advertisements at street -level (just within the ellipse in Figure 4.4) would be more often fixated than advertisements at raised -level (just outside the ellipse in Figure 4.4). This was indeed what r- 23
CEDR
Conference Europeenne
/// des Directeurs des Routes
Conference of European
Directors of Roads
-505-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
the researchers found. However, when participants were asked to look for advertisements in the video clips, the advertisements at raised -level were better remembered than the advertisements at street -level.

The studies so far did not account for the contents of the advertisement. When the content of what is displayed on the billboard is not relevant for the road user, she or he will normally soon turn the eyes back to the road and traffic situation. This is probably the reason why dwell times at billboards mostly are brief. However, it could be that drivers keep on looking at billboards because what is displayed on the billboard is relevant for them and could affect their emotions. In a study with a motorcycle simulator, participants who were equipped with an eye tracker, passed affect -laden static billboards (Megias et al., 2011). These billboards could display something pleasant (e.g. a laughing baby), something unpleasant (e.g. an injured person), or something neutral (e.g. a spoon). More fixations were made and dwell times were longer when the billboards displayed pictures that were pleasant and unpleasant than when the displayed pictures were neutral. There was no difference in the number of fixations and dwell times between unpleasant and pleasant billboards.

4.3.3 Conclusions regarding gaze behaviour
It can be concluded that for approximately half the billboards drivers pass, they do not look at them at all. When they look, they rarely look at them for more than two seconds. However, they look more often and for a longer time at static digital billboards than at traditional static billboards.

Video billboards with moving images seem to attract most attention. The closer the billboard is located near the forward road view of the driver, the more often drivers will look at the billboard.

Billboards at street level are more often looked at than billboards that are placed a few meters above the ground. Drivers look less often at billboards when the task demands increase.

Although dwell times of 2 seconds and more do not occur very often, they do occur at least some of the time, and glances of 2 seconds or longer away from the forward roadway increase crash risk substantially. Even very short dwell times could conceivably increase crash risk when the road and traffic situation is complex (see e.g. Simons -Morton et al., 2014), and these shorter dwell times are still common. One also has to keep in mind that although dwell times of 2 seconds or longer are rare, they occur more often when drivers look at video billboards and at static digital billboards, especially around moments when the advertisement at the billboard switches. Dwell times are longer when billboards display affect -laden pictures. When the age of the driver is taken into account, it seems that young drivers tend to look more often and longer at static digital billboards around moments that a switch of advertisement takes place than at static billboards.

4.4 Studies on driving behaviour
A total of 12 studies were found that had looked at changes in driving behaviour in the vicinity of billboards. These were all simulator studies because subtle behaviour changes can accurately be measured in a simulator, but are difficult to measure in real traffic. In the next paragraphs we present the effects on speed, lateral control, headway, response time, and driving errors and violations. A final paragraph specifically looks at the effect of the contents of the advertisement on driving behaviour.
24 N�
° x
CEDR
_
Conference Europe —a
000 des Di—teurs des Routes
Conference of European
Directors of Roads
-506-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety

4.4.1 Speed
The results on changes in speed near billboards are inconclusive. Chattington et al. (2009) found that drivers lowered their speed slightly when drivers approached a billboard. This was more so when it was a video billboard and the time the billboard was visible was medium (approximately 4 seconds) or short (approximately 2 seconds). In contrast, Marciano and Yeshurun (2012) found that speed increased slightly when drivers passed static billboards. Bendak and AI-Saleh (2010) found in their study that there were more speeding violations in the vicinity of static billboard, but this effect did not reach statistical significance. Milloy and Caird (2011) did not find differences in speed when they compared speed in the baseline condition (no billboards), the condition with traditional static billboards, and the condition with static digital billboards.

4.4.2 Lateral control
With regard to lateral control the studies are unanimous: lateral control deteriorates slightly when participants pass billboards, i.e. drivers tended to swerve more in the vicinity of a billboard.

Chattington et al. (2009) found that in particular video billboards deteriorated lateral control. The standard deviation of the lateral lane position (an indicator of swerving) increased when drivers approached these billboards when they were visible for a short period of time (2 seconds) and when they were visible for a medium period of time (4 seconds) but not when they were visible for a longer period of time (6 seconds). Young et al. (2009) found that the time spent out of lane and the number of lane excursions increased near traditional static billboards, especially when these billboards were located along rural roads. Bendak and AI-Saleh (2010) found that drivers tended to drift from lane near traditional static billboards.

4.4.3 Headway
On the question of whether participants drive closer behind lead vehicles when they pass billboards, the evidence is not conclusive. Milloy and Caird (2011) found that the minimum headway distance, the shortest distance between the front bumper of in this case the simulator car and the rear bumper of the lead vehicle, was shorter when participants passed static digital billboards than when they passed traditional static billboards. The difference in headway was also statistically significant between traditional static billboards and no billboards with the shorter headways when participants passed traditional static billboards. Bendak and AI-Saleh (2010) conclude that tailgating occurred more often near billboards than in the baseline condition (no billboards). However, this difference did not reach statistical significance. Young et al. (2009) did not find any difference in headway when participants passed billboards of any kind compared with the baseline condition (no billboards).

4.4.4 Response time
Do billboards cause an increase in response time to unexpected driving events such as a lead vehicle braking? Milloy and Caird (2011) found that participants took significantly longer to respond to a braking lead vehicle when they passed static digital billboards than when they passed traditional static billboards or did not pass a billboard at all (the baseline condition). They also found that in their simulator study more collisions with the suddenly braking lead vehicle occurred when drivers passed static digital billboards than when they passed traditional static billboards or did not pass a billboard at all. In this simulator study the advertisement on a static digital billboard always automatically switched when the vehicle approached. No other studies were found about response latencies near billboards. The study of Milloy and Caird (2011) 25 flfl CEDR
y Conference Eurapeenne
`o -Direcleursdes Routes
Conference of European
Directors of Roads
-507-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
indicates that in particular static digital billboards cause an increase in response time around moments of a switch from one advertisement to the other on these billboards.

4.4.5 Driving errors and violations
In the simulator study of Edquist, Horberry, Hosking, and Johnston (2011), billboards (a traditional static billboard or a static digital billboard) could be placed on the other side of the road where a road sign instructed drivers to change lanes. Did participants more often not change lanes when a billboard was present? And when they did change lanes, did they do so later in time at the presence of a billboard? More often, participants did not change lanes when a billboard was present. Of the 1152 times when participants had to change lanes, 62 times they did not do so and of these 62 times, 50 times were when a billboard was placed opposite the lane change sign.

This difference was statistically significant. When participants did change lanes, they did so significantly later in time when a billboard was present. There was no difference between traditional static billboards and static digital billboards.

Bendak and AI-Saleh (2010) found that participants significantly more often crossed an intersection recklessly when a traditional static billboard was placed near that intersection than when there was no billboard. The authors do not define what they considered to be reckless crossing. Bendak and AI-Saleh (2010) also found that changing lanes in the vicinity of traditional static billboards occurred more often without signalling when there was no billboard.

4.4.6 Effect of content of advertisement on road user behaviour The content of an advertisement can have an effect on the emotional state of the road user and the content of what is displayed on a billboard can for instance also activate drivers to execute certain dangerous actions such as dialling a telephone number. No studies were found about evocations on billboards to engage in distracting activities. However, some studies were found about affect -laden advertisements on driving behaviour. Meglas, Di Stasi, Maldonado, Catena, and Candido (2014) conducted a study with a motorcycle simulator in which participants encountered an intersection with an amber traffic light after just having passed a billboard. The depicted picture on that static billboard could be either pleasant, unpleasant, or a neutral. The content of the billboard had no effect on the decision to speed up or to brake at the amber traffic light. However, the displayed pictures had an effect on the tendency to take risks when also the moment of the decision to brake or to speed up was taken into account. The risk taking tendency (i.e. to speed up at the very last moment) was lower after having passed a negative advertisement compared with a positive and neutral advertisement.

In a simulator study by Chan and Singhal (2013) participants drove past a traditional static billboard that contained a single word and no pictures. This could be a negative word (e.g. stress), a positive word (e.g. joy) or a neutral word (e.g. clock). They measured several driving performance indicators just after having passed a billboard. These indicators were speed, lateral position, steering wheel reversal rate and steering wheel angle. The type of words only had an effect on speed. Drivers had lower mean speeds when there were emotional words (both positive and negative) compared with neutral words, and this slowing effect lasted longer when there were positive words. In a follow-up simulator study the researchers also had billboards with taboo arousing words (Chan, Madan, & Singhal, 2016). Results showed that taboo words captured the most attention. Interestingly, taboo words appeared to improved lateral control for a while. 26 CEDR
Conference E—peenne
JJJ des Dire teum des Routes
Conference of European
Directors of Roads
-508-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety

4.4.7 Conclusions regarding driving behaviour
There is quite strong evidence that lateral control deteriorates when drivers look at billboards.

They tend to drift slowly out of their lane. Looking at billboards doesn't seem to influence vehicle speed very much. However, there are some indications that headways get shorter in particular when drivers pass static digital billboards and video billboards. Close following is even more dangerous than in circumstances without billboards because there is quite strong evidence that drivers tend to respond (brake) later in time near static digital billboards and video billboards when a lead vehicle suddenly brakes. Drivers also more often overlook road signs and tend to forget to signal when they change lanes near billboards. The content of what is displayed on billboards does not seem to influence the driving behaviour so much. Although the content had minor effects on driving behaviour and the tendency to take risks, one has to keep in mind that studies about the displayed content were all simulator studies. It could be that drivers will behave somewhat differently when exposed to arousing pictures and text in real traffic.

4.5 Studies on situation awareness
Road users need to be aware of what is going on around them. At every moment in time they have to be able to detect the relevant changes in the road and traffic situation, comprehend what these changes mean, and predict how possible hazards can develop into acute threats that need to be anticipated (e.g. Crundall, 2016). Can billboards diminish situation awareness of drivers? Only one study was found in which this was investigated (Young, Stephens, Logan & Lenne, 2017). Participants in this study were instructed to maintain a continuous dialogue of their internal thoughts related to their journey. They had to verbalize these thoughts aloud. These included general thoughts about where they were positioning their vehicle and why; thoughts about the road environment, road condition, road signs or billboards, road signals, other road users, what they were doing, how that related to the driver and what actions they were taking and intended to take. All this was recorded while the participants drove a fixed route in real traffic that took them past traditional static billboards. Results indicated that the structure and content of drivers' situation awareness was not appreciably affected by the billboards. Drivers mentioned billboards when driving demand was low, such as when driving on a motorway with light to moderate traffic, in lower speed zones, or when stationary. However, when drivers were required to perform a manoeuvre or driving demands increased, drivers did not mention the billboards but mentioned subjects related to the driving task. This indicates that the participants in this study regulated the attention they paid to billboards.

4.6 Other studies and overview studies

4.6.1 Other studies
All studies reviewed so far examined distraction from billboards in real traffic or in a simulator.

Marciano and Setter (2017) used a method which was designed instead to make advertisements the primary focus of attention. Participants watched static advertisements that were displayed on a monitor and had to answer questions about them, while they examined the advertisement, they had to execute a tracking task that was displayed to the right of the depicted advertisement simultaneously. This tracking task resembled the steering aspect of the driving task. Participants also had to identify a change of colour of a circle that was displayed in the upper right corner of the screen (a monitoring task). The question addressed was which type of advertisement w= 27 C E� D� R
Conference Eoro o peenne
des Directeurs des Routes
Conference of European
Directors of Roads
-509-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
deteriorated performance on the tracking task and the circle colour change identification task the most. There were five clusters of advertisements:
— Cluster 1: many words and a small picture,
— Cluster 2: many words and no pictures,
— Cluster 3: minimum of text (one or two words) in large font size, — Cluster 4: large pictures with a minimum of text, and — Cluster 5: large picture or many pictures and many text blocks.

The Cluster 5 billboards that the authors labelled as the `loaded billboards', deteriorated the tracking task the most. The Cluster 4 billboards with large detailed pictures and only a few words, deteriorated the circle colour change identification task the most. The Cluster 3 type of billboards with a minimum of text in large font size affected the two secondary tasks the least.

The fact that billboards with only a few words interfered with the (surrogate) steering task the least was also found in a simulator study by Schieber, Limrick, McCall, and Beck (2014). In their study the billboard contained 4, 8 or 12 words. Participants drifted gradually away from the centre line while they read the billboard and then re-established their course abruptly after having passed the billboard. These effects were stronger the more words were displayed on the billboard.

Zalesinska (2018) conducted a study about the effects of luminance, size and location of light emitting static digital billboard on response times (the onset of braking) when drivers passed a static digital billboard at night and a sudden event (e.g. a pedestrian suddenly crossing the road) occurred. This was a simulator study. Luminance, size, and location of the billboard all had an effect on response time. The more light the digital billboard emitted, the larger the illuminated billboard was, and the closer the billboard was located near the Focus of Expansion (see Figure

4.4), the later the participants braked. There were also significant combined effects (interaction effects) of luminance and size and of luminance and location, but not of location and size. There also was no three way interaction effect of illumination, size, and location. Luminance had the largest impact on response time. The lighting conditions were: 0 cd/m2 (Candela per square meter), 200 cd/m2, 400 cd/m2, and 800 cd/m2. The difference in response time latency was the largest between 0 cd/m2 (no luminance) and 200 cd/m2. The response time increased with approximately 100 ms when the advertisement emitted 200 cd/m2 relative to the condition in which the advertisement emitted no light.

4.6.2 Previous literature reviews
The present literature review about the effects of roadside advertisements on crash rate and driving behaviour is not the first literature review on this topic. The previous reviews are briefly summarized in this paragraph.

The literature review of Brijs et al. (2014) is in Dutch and is about static digital billboards and video billboards. The authors conclude that epidemiological studies based on crash rates near billboards do not yield sufficient evidence that these billboards increase crash risk. There are only a few epidemiological studies and these studies are based on too few crashes. The authors conclude that there is however sufficient evidence that these types of billboards do distract drivers. Static digital billboards and even more so video billboards negatively influence gaze behaviour and driving performance. Brijs et al. (2014) stress the negative effect of 'visual clutter' caused by billboards; when these billboards are located near complex road and traffic situations with lots of road signs, they can hinder scanning for relevant information. The authors also stress s_ 28
CEOR
Conference Europeenne
/// tles 0irecteurs des Routes
Conference of European
Directors of Roads
-510-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
the danger of glare caused by too brightly illuminated billboards. However, they do not refer to studies that have explicitly investigated the negative effects of visual clutter and glare caused by static digital billboards and video billboards.

Decker et al. (2015) conducted a literature review of the effects billboards of any kind may have on visual behaviour. The authors conclude that there is sufficient evidence that when drivers look at billboards, 10-20% of glances are longer than 0.75 seconds. Video billboards and static digital billboards (at around the moment the advertisement switches) distract drivers more than traditional static billboards. Occasionally, fixations can be over 2 seconds at video billboards and static digital billboards, but the authors conclude that it is not possible to provide an accurate prevalence. Although video billboards and static digital billboards elicit longer fixations than traditional static billboards no evidence was found that dwell times differed between the digital billboards and the traditional static billboards. Furthermore, the authors did not find evidence that billboards in general affected glances at expected driving -relevant stimuli, or the proportion of time drivers spent glancing at the forward roadway. However, they did find evidence that especially the video billboards and static digital billboards negatively affected glances at unexpected driving -relevant stimuli such as a lead vehicle that suddenly brakes, and that vertically scanning decreased.

The report of Wachtel (2016) is not a literature review in the true sense of the word. It is mainly a compendium of recent studies on static digital billboards and video billboards. The author concludes that recent studies indicate that due to their salience static digital billboards and in particular video billboards attract more attention than traditional static billboards. These 'Commercial Electronic Variable Message Signs (CEVMS)' affect the glance behaviour and driving performance of young novice drivers more than that of older and more experienced drivers. The author also mentions that the most recent epidemiological studies tend to indicate (but not prove) that CEVMS increase crash risk. However, some of the recent epidemiological studies that showed no effect on crash rate are missing in this compendium.

Finally, Ziakopoulos et al. (2017) reviewed the literature about crash rate, glance behaviour, and driving performance that are associated with 'outside factors'. These outside factors were billboards but also other objects or events and included even sun glare. Only four of the twelve included studies about outside factors were about billboards. The authors conclude that in general outside factors increase crash rate. However, in the only study about the effect of roadside advertisement on crash rate they included (Yannis et al., 2013) it was found that roadside advertisement did not increase crash rate. Although this study has sufficient statistical power the design is rather weak. It is a before -and -after study without a comparison site. 29 `�1
CEDR
Conference
tles Oirecteurs tles Routes
,s des Rout
Conference of European
Oirectore of Roads
-511-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
5 Findings structured within the SEEV-framework
According to the SEEV-framework presented in Chapter 3, distraction by roadside advertisements is caused by their salience, by the effort road users have to invest to 'read' the billboards, by the expectations of the road users, and by the value the content and appearance of the messages have for road users. In addition, drivers can be dazzled by the luminance of billboards. This chapter presents these five determinants and their factors with (in italic) what the literature review has revealed about these factors. It is important to note that many studies did show an effect of a certain factor but that the results were hardly ever precise enough to allow for concrete quantitative recommendations. For example, exposure time of an advertisement on a static digital billboard has an effect on gaze behaviour and driving behaviour. However, it is not possible to state that when exposure time increases with X seconds the change in behaviour Y will be Z percent.

5.1 Salience
Factors related to Salience are:
— The presence of moving images (videos) or animations
When video billboards were included in the studies, these billboards had the most deteriorating effect on gaze behaviour and driving performance, especially for young drivers. — Other movement such as rotating advertisements
No studies included rotating objects (such as the three slowly rotating advertisements placed on a pillar in Figure 5.1).
s; re'„in nl
__ MAAK-T Itt ETTEN•LEUP,! "
Figure 5.1 Example of three slowly rotating illuminated traditional static billboards that are placed on a pillar.

Fast moving objects grab the attention but very slow rotating objects probably not so much.

However, no studies were found regarding this topic.
30 C
�A; y CEDR
Conference Europeenne
des Direct— des Routes
Conference of European
Directors of Roads
-512-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
— Lighting, colour and contrast with background
This factor is not about glare that brightly illuminated billboards can cause but about their increased conspicuity because they stand out against the background. The effects of increased conspicuity are difficult to investigate in simulators but have been investigated in the field studies. No clear evidence was found that illuminated billboards affected gaze behaviour more when it was dark than during daylight. It is however important to note that only static digital billboards were included in these field studies and that they probably emitted no more light than was allowed by the regulations.
— Exposure time of an advertisement on a digital billboard Both in simulator studies and in field studies it was found that at the moment a switch of advertisements occurs, they attract the most visual attention. More drivers tend to look at these billboards at those moments and when they look, they look longer. The less drivers experience a switch of the advertisement when they approach, the less drivers will be distracted by static digital billboards. This implies that the longer the exposure time of an advertisement on a static digital billboard, the better this is for road safety. — Transition from one advertisement to the other on static digital billboards No studies were found about the way an advertisement on a static digital billboard is replaced by another. These transitions can be quick without a brief period with a black screen between the two advertisements or slow with a black screen between the two advertisements. It is also possible that the old advertisement slowly fades out and the new advertisement slowly fades in. There is no consensus between experts. Some argue that transition should be slow and others argue that transition should be as fast as possible (e.g. Wallace, 2003a).

5.2 Effort
Factors related to Effort are:
— Position of the advertisement in relation to the forward view of the driver The studies clearly indicate that the closer the billboard is located near the default gaze direction of drivers (i.e. the forward road view), the more drivers will glance at the billboard.

Billboards at street level attract more attention than when they are placed a couple of metres above the ground. The more drivers have to turn their head in order to 'read' the advertisement, the less often they will take the effort to look at it. However, when they do look for instance at billboards that are placed alongside the road, the longer their eyes will be away from the forward road view (Crundall et al., 2006). — Size of advertisement
Only one study was found in which the size of the billboard was an independent variable (Zalesinska, 2018). The larger the static digital billboard was in this study, the longer it took drivers to start to brake when an acute hazard suddenly materialized at the moment billboard was in sight.

The visual clutter in the forward view of drivers (e.g. buildings, other billboards, and road signs that surrounds the advertisement)
31 C Eon Dq R
k-" '49 Conference Europ6enne
des Directeurs des Routes
Conference of European
Directors of Roads
-513-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
In for instance urban areas or in industrial zones, the road environment may provide so much irrelevant visual information that it is difficult for the driver to select the information that is relevant for driving (Edquist, 2008). This is called `visual clutter. No studies were found in which the visual clutter that is caused by billboards was explicitly analysed. Experts argue that because of the fact that visual clutter may deteriorate driving performance, billboards and especially static digital billboards or video billboards should not be placed near road and traffic situations where drivers have to concentrate on the driving task and to take decisions such as near intersections (e.g. Wallace, 2003b). In most guidelines it is stated that because of the danger of visual clutter there should be a minimum distance between one static digital billboard and the other (see for an overview: OMA 2014). Although it is better to avoid visual clutter it appears from the evidence that drivers are capable of some kind of self -regulation.

When the road and traffic situation is complex drivers tend to concentrate more on the driving task and tend to look less often at billboards (Young et al., 2017). — Font size of the letters on billboards
No studies were found that examined font size of the letters on billboards. The study of Marciano and Setter (2017) indicates that billboards with only a few words in large font size deteriorated a tracking task that resembles steering the least. — The amount of text on a billboard
The more text displayed on a billboard the more lateral control deteriorates when drivers try to read the billboard (Schieber et al., 2014). However, it could be in real world driving that drivers decide not to read a billboard when it contains a lot of text. — The composition of pictures and text on a billboard
The so called loaded advertisements with various text blocks and pictures deteriorated a tracking task the most (Marciano & Setter, 2017).
— The traffic density at the spot of the advertisement
In the simulator study of Marciano and Yeshurun (2012) it was found that when the traffic density was low, participants more often looked at billboards and that the dwell times were also longer than when the traffic density was high. This indicates that there is some kind of self -regulation. Despite this self -regulation, drivers start to brake later when a lead vehicle suddenly brakes when they approach a static digital billboard compared with when there are no billboards (Milloy & Caird, 2011).
— The complexity of the traffic situation at the spot of the billboard There are indications that billboards affect decision making in complex road situations. In the simulator study of Edquist et al. (2011) participants more often did not change lanes when a static billboard was present opposite the road sign that indicated that drivers had to change lanes, compared with when there was no billboard.

5.3 Expectations
Factors related to Expectations are:
— Do the advertisements look like road signs?
No studies were found about this subject.
\ 32
CEDR
Conference Eurepeenne
des Direcleurs des Routes
Conference of Eurepean
Directors of Roads
-514-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
— Are the advertisements placed at spots where drivers search for relevant information for the safe execution of the driving task?
In the field study of Smiley et al. (2005) the static digital billboards were placed in an urban area near intersections with road signs and traffic lights. Drivers more often did not look at road signs after the billboards were placed, compared with before they were placed. — Do the advertisements (partly) block the view of information that is relevant for the safe execution of the driving task?
No studies were found about this subject.
— Does a billboard refer to information that will be on a next billboard along the road (e.g.: "See our next billboard along this road what we can offer you.")? No studies we found about this subject.

5.4 Value
Factors related to Value are:
— Content of message, pictures and or texts that may evoke emotions There are indeed indications that emotion -arousing pictures and words have an effect on driving performance. These effects are small and sometimes they can also improve driving performance.
— Content related to current goals of the driver (for example food, drink) No studies could be found in which for instance hungry participants and participants that are not hungry search for billboards that inform drivers about restaurants in the neighbourhood. — Text that encourage drivers to engage in distracting activities (e.g. using their mobile phone).

No studies were found about advertisements on billboards that encouraged drivers to carry out distracting activities such as texting.

5.5 Luminance
Factors related to Luminance that are not related to salience, are:
— Does the illuminated billboard/object cause glare?
Whether illuminated billboards cause glare is difficult to investigate in a simulator. One simulator study was found on this topic (Zalesinska, 2018). In this study was found that while driving in the dark, a luminance of 200 cdl already had some deteriorating effects on driving performance. In all the field studies that were found in which participants drove in the dark and passed static digital billboards or video billboards, the problem of glare is never mentioned. It could be that glare is not mentioned because the existing illuminated billboards in these studies met the local requirements about illumination. In most of these regulations, the maximum amount of light a certain surface is allowed is related to the background light.

There is more background light during hours of darkness on urban roads than on rural roads.

It could also be that glare is never mentioned because no older drivers participated in these field studies.
— Does the brightness of the illuminated billboard make unilluminated road signs almost invisible?
No field studies were found in which participants were not able to read the road signs in the dark because a billboard next to the road sign emitted too much light. �3 33 CE�}DR
/ Conference Europeenne
,/' des Directeurs des Routes
Conference of Eumpean
Directors of Roads
-515-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
6 Overall conclusions
Five studies were found about the association between crashes and roadside advertisements.

The results are inconclusive. In one study an increase in the number of crashes was found near billboards and in the four other studies not. However, it is very difficult to assess the effect of billboards on crash risk. One issue is the lack of statistical power. Because crashes are rare events and the stretches of road in which a billboard could contribute to a crash are short, the included number of crashes was mostly small. One of the five studies, a study in which no effect on crash risk was found, indeed seems to lack statistical power but in the four other studies power seems to be sufficient. Another issue is the research design. Three of the five studies were before -and -after -studies (comparing the crash rate before the placement of billboards and the crash rate after the placement of billboards) and in two studies a comparison site was also included. A before -and -after -study with a comparison site is a stronger research design than a before -and -after -study without such a group. There were two studies with sufficient statistical power and a comparison site. In one of them an increase of crashes near billboards was found, but not in the other.

Because of this, studies that focus on SPIs such as looking behaviour and driving behaviour are the best available to make an assessment of the safety of billboards.

Approximately half of drivers do not look at billboards when they pass them. However, those drivers that do, look more often and longer at static digital billboards (in particular at moments that the advertisement switches) and even more so at video billboards than at traditional static billboards. They more often look at billboards at street level than at raised level, but when they look at billboards at raised level they tend to look longer. Young novice drivers are inclined to look at static digital billboards and video billboards the most. Drivers rarely look longer than two seconds at a billboard. However, sometimes they do, especially when it is a static digital billboard or a video billboard. This is worrying as long glances at objects outside the vehicle increase the crash risk substantially (Dingus et al., 2016).

There is quite strong evidence that lane keeping deteriorates when drivers look at billboards.

Billboards do not seem to have a strong impact on speed. In some studies it was found that headways get shorter in particular when drivers pass static digital billboards and video billboards.

This is dangerous because response latencies are longer when drivers look at billboards. They for instance brake later in time when they look at a billboard and a lead vehicle suddenly brakes.

Drivers also more often overlook road signs and tend to forget to signal when they change lanes near billboards. The content of what is displayed on billboards does not seem to influence driving behaviour very much. What is displayed on the advertisements (arousing pictures and texts) influences decision making and driving performance only slightly. However, more research is needed to assess the effect of emotion -laden pictures and text on driving behaviour.

The less demanding the driving task, the more drivers let their eyes wander to irrelevant objects.

It seems that most drivers are capable of regulating adequately the attentional resources the driving task requires (Young et al., 2017). However, in traffic the task demands can suddenly increase and these events (e.g. a lead vehicle that suddenly brakes) are not always properly anticipated. In those circumstances looking at billboards can have detrimental effects. 34 CEDR
Conference Europeenne
des Directeurs des Routes
Conference of European
Directors of Roads
-516-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
In most field studies no difference was found in gaze behaviour at illuminated billboards during day and night. This does not mean that LED billboards (light -emitting diode billboards) such as most static digital billboards and video billboards do not have an impact on driving behaviour.

Most jurisdictions regulate the amount of light billboards are allowed to emit. The illuminated billboards drivers passed at night in these field studies most probably were in compliance with these regulations. Illuminated billboards definitely can cause glare. In her simulator study, Zalesinska (2018) found that the more light a billboard emitted the longer the response latencies were when an acute threatening situation such as a pedestrian that suddenly crossed the road, occurred.
1IERTS 35 g� CEO R
Conference Eurepeenne
des Directeurs des Routes
Conference of European
Directors of Roads
—517—

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
References
Abelson, R. P. (1981). Psychological status of the script concept. American Psychologist, 36(7), 751-729.

Belyusar, D., Reimer, B., Mehler, B. & Coughlin, J. F. (2016). A field study on the effects of digital billboards on glance behavior during highway driving. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 88(Supplement C), 88-96. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/i.aap.2015.12.014 Bendak, S., & AI-Saleh, K. (2010). The role of roadside advertising signs in distracting drivers.

International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 40(3), 233-236. doi:
https://doi.orq/l 0.1016/j.ergon.2009.12.001
Boets, S., Vandemeulebroek, F. & Daniels, S. (2018, in preparation). Roadside advertising: an inventory of current practices and future trends. D1.1 b of the ADVERTS project, Assessing Distraction of Vehicle drivers in Europe from Roadside Technology -based Signage. CEDR Transnational Road Research Programme.

Brijs, T., Brijs, K., & Cornu, J. (2014). Studie naar de effecten van vrij programmeerbare verlichte borden op de verkeersveiligheid. Retrieved from Hasselt, Belgium:
h ttps://u h d space. uhasselt.be/dspace/bitstream/1942/16815/1 /finaal%20rapport%20- %20definitief.pdf
Chan, M., Madan, C. R., & Singhal, A. (2016). The effects of taboo -related distraction on driving performance. Acta Psychologica, 168(Supplement C), 20-26. doi:
https://doi.org/l 0.1016/j. actpsy.2016.03.010
Chan, M., & Singhal, A. (2013). The emotional side of cognitive distraction: Implications for road safety. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 50(Supplement C), 147-154. doi:
https://doi.org/l 0.1016/i.aap.2012.04.004
Chattington, M., Reed, N., Basacik, D., Flint, A., & Parkes, A. (2009). Investigating driver distraction: The effects of video and static advertising (PPR 409). Retrieved from Wokingham, Berksire, United Kingdom
Crundall, D. (2016). Hazard prediction discriminates between novice and experienced drivers.

Accident Analysis & Prevention, 86, 47-58. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/l 0.1016/i.aap.2015.10.006
Crundall, D., Underwood, G., & Chapman, P. (2002). Attending to the peripheral world while driving. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 16(4), 459-475.

Crundall, D., Van Loon, E., & Underwood, G. (2006). Attraction and distraction of attention with roadside advertisements. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 38(4), 671-677. doi:
https://doi.org/l 0.1016/j.aap.2005.12.012
Decker, J. S., Stannard, S. J., McManus, B., Wittig, S. M. O., Sisiopiku, V. P., & Stavrinos, D. (2015). The Impact of Billboards on Driver Visual Behavior: A Systematic Literature Review. Traffic Injury Prevention, 16(3), 234-239. Doi:
https://doi.org/l 0.1080/15389588.2014.936407
Dingus, T. A., Guo, F., Lee, S., Antin, J. F., Perez, M., Buchanan -King, M., & Hankey, J. (2016).

Driver crash risk factors and prevalence evaluation using naturalistic driving data.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. doi:
htti)s://doi.org/l 0.1073/pnas.1513271113
Dukic, T., Ahlstrom, C., Patten, C., Kettwich, C., & Kircher, K. (2013). Effects of Electronic Billboards on Driver Distraction. Traffic Injury Prevention, 14(5), 469-476. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/l 0.1080/15389588.2012.731546
�a
36 CEDR
> Conference ® tles 0irecleumdd,s es Routes
Conference of European
Directors of Roads
-518-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
Edquist, J. (2008). The Effects of Visual Clutter on Driving Performance (PhD), Monash University, Clayton, Australia.

Edquist, J., Horberry, T., Hosking, S., & Johnston, I. (2011). Effects of advertising billboards during simulated driving. Applied Ergonomics, 42(4), 619-626. doi:
https://doi.ora/10.1016/i.apergo.2010.08.013
Elvik, R. (2002). The importance of confounding in observational before -and -after studies of road safety measures. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 34(5), 631-635. doi:
https://doi.org/l 0.1016/S0001-4575(01)00062-8
Garrison, T. M., & Williams, C. C. (2013). Impact of Relevance and Distraction on Driving Performance and Visual Attention in a Simulated Driving Environment. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 27(3), 396-405. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acp.2917 Gitelman, v., Zaidel, D., & Doveh, E. (2012, 29-31 August ). Influence of billboards on driving behavior and road safety. Paper presented at the 18th International Conference on Traffic and Transport Psychology ICTTP, Groningen, The Netherlands.

Groeger, J. A. (2000). Understanding driving: applying cognitive psychology to a complex everyday task. Hove, East Sussex, UK: Routledge, Psychology Press.

Gugerty, L. J. (1997). Situation awareness during driving: Explicit and implicit knowledge in dynamic spatial memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 3(1), 42-66. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1076-898X.3.1.42
Hahn, B., Ross, T. J., & Stein, E. A. (2006). Neuroanatomical dissociation between bottom -up and top -down processes of visuospatial selective attention. Neurolmage, 32(2), 842-853.

Henderson, J. M., Brockmole, J. R., Castelhano, M. S., & Mack, M. (2007). Visual saliency does not account for eye movements during visual search in real -world scenes. In R. P. G. van Gompel, M. H. Fischer, W. S. Murray, & R. L. Hill (Eds.), Eye movements a window on mind and Brain (1st ed., pp. 538-562). Amsterdam: Elsevier Ltd.

Herrstedt, L., Greibe, P., & Andersson, P. (2013, 15-17 May). Driver attention is captured by roadside advertising signs. Paper presented at the the 16th International Conference Road Safety on Four Continents, Beijing, China.

Herrstedt, L., Greibe, P., Andersson, P., & la Cour Lund, B. (2017). Visuel distraction fra lysreklamer tangs veje. Retrieved from Soborg, Denmark:
http://vw✓ w.trafitec.dk/sites/defauIt/files/publications/Lysreklamer°/D20Iangs°/D20veie°/D20- %20N MF%20Rapport%20FINAL%2030.%20Marts%202017.pdf
Horrey, W. J., Wickens, C. D., & Consalus, K. P. (2006). Modeling drivers' visual attention allocation while interacting with in -vehicle technologies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 12(2), 67-78.

Horswill, M. S., & McKenna, F. P. (2004). Drivers' hazard perception ability: situation awareness on the road. In S. Banbury & S. Tremblay (Eds.), A cognitive approach to situation awareness (pp. 155-175). Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.

Itti, L., & Koch, C. (2001). Computational modelling of visual attention. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2(3), 194-203.

Izadpanah, P., Omrani, R., Koo, S., & Hadayeghi, A. (2014). Effect of Static Electronic Advertising Signs on Road Safety: An Experimental Case Study. Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, 28(Supplement 1), S33-S36.
.`AVERTS 37 C E R
Conference Europeenne
des N-teurs des Routes
Conference of European
Directors of Roads
-519-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
Lee, J. D., Young, K. L., & Regan, M. A. (2008). Defining driver distraction. In M. A. Regan, J. D.

Lee, & K. L. Young (Eds.), Driver distraction: Theory, effects, and mittigation (pp. 31-40).

Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group.

Mader, M., Bresges, A., Topal, R., Busse, A., Forsting, M., & Gizewski, E. R. (2009). Simulated car driving in fMRI--Cerebral activation patterns driving an unfamiliar and a familiar route.

Neuroscience Letters, 464(3), 222-227.

Marciano, H., & Setter, P. e. (2017). The effect of billboard design specifications on driving: A pilot study. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 104(Supplement C), 174-184. doi:
https://doi.org/l 0.1016/i.aap.2017.04.024
Marciano, H., & Yeshurun, Y. (2012). Perceptual load in central and peripheral regions and its effects on driving performance: advertising billboards. Work, 41(no. Supplement 1), 3181- 3188.

McKenna F. P. & Farrand, P. (1999). The Role of Automaticity in Driving. In G.B. Grayson (ed.), Behavioural Research in Road Safety IX, Wokingham, Berkshire: Transport Research Laboratory (TRL).

Megias, A., Di Stasi, L. L., Maldonado, A., Catena, A., & Candido, A. (2014). Emotion -laden stimuli influence our reactions to traffic lights. Transportation Research Part F. Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 22(Supplement C), 96-103. doi:
https://doi.org/l 0.1016/i.trf.2013.09.017
Megias, A., Maldonado, A., Catena, A., Di Stasi, L. L., Serrano, J., & Candido, A. (2011).

Modulation of attention and urgent decisions by affect -laden roadside advertisement in risky driving scenarios. Safety Science, 49(10), 1388-1393. doi:
https://doi.orq/l 0.1016/i.ssci.2011.06.001
Mesken, J. (2006). Determinants and consequences of drivers' emotions. (Vol. SWOV dissertationseries.). Leidschendam, The Netherlands: SWOV Institute for Road Safety Research.

Milloy, S. L., & Caird, J. K. (2011). External driver distraction: The effects of video billboards and wind farms on driving performance. In D. L. Fisher, M. Rizzo, J. K. Caird, & J. D. Lee (Eds.), Handbook of driving simulation for engineering, medicine, and psychology (pp. 16- 11 - 16-14). Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press.

Misokefalou, E., Papadimitriou, F., Kopelias, P., & Eliou, N. (2016). Evaluating Driver Distraction Factors in Urban Motorways. A Naturalistic Study Conducted in Attica Tollway, Greece.

Transportation Research Procedia, 15(Supplement C), 771-782. doi:
https://doi.org/l 0.1016/4.trpro.2016.06.064
Norman, D. A., & Shallice, T. (1986). Attention to action: Willed and automatic control of behavior.

In R. J. Davidson, G. E. Schwartz, & D. Shapiro (Eds.), Consciousness and self - regulation: advances in research and theory (Vol. 4, pp. 1-18). New York: Plenum Press.

OMA (2014). Digital billboards and road safety: An analysis of policy and research findings in 2013-2014. Retrieved from Sydney:
http://www.oma.org.au/ data/assets/pdf file/0005/9842/OMA discussion paper on dig tal billboards and road safety JuIV2014 FINAL.pdf
Parkhurst, D., Law, K., & Niebur, E. (2002). Modeling the role of salience in the allocation of overt visual attention. Vision Research, 42, 107-123.

Perez, W. A., Bertola, M. A., Kennedy, J. F., & Molino, J. A. (2011). Driver visual behavior in the presence of commercial electronic variable message signs (CEVMS). Retrieved from 38 A
= CEDR
Conference Europeenne
JJO tles Di,ecteurs des Routes
Conference of European
Directors of Roads
-520-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
Washington DC:
httos:// www.fhwa.dot.gov/real estate/oac/visual behavior report/review/cevms2.pdf Posner, M. I., & Petersen, S. E. (1990). The attention system of the human brain. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 13(1), 25-42. doi: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ne.13.030190.000325 Ranney, T. A., Mazzae, E., Garrott, R., & Goodman, M. J. (2000). NHTSA driver distraction research: past, present, and future. Retrieved from Washington D.C.:

Salmon, P. M., Stanton, N. A., & Young, K. L. (2012). Situation awareness on the road: review, theoretical and methodological issues, and future directions. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 13(4), 472-492. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/l 0.1080/1463922X.2010.539289
Schank, R. C., & Abelson, R. P. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals, and understanding: An inquiry into human knowledge structures. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Schieber, F., Limrick, K., McCall, R., & Beck, A. (2014). Evaluation of the Visual Demands of Digital Billboards Using a Hybrid Driving Simulator. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 2214-2218.

Simons -Morton, B. G., Guo, F., Klauer, S. G., Ehsani, J. P., & Pradhan, A. K. (2014). Keep Your Eyes on the Road: Young Driver Crash Risk Increases According to Duration of Distraction. Journal of Adolescent Health, 54(5, Supplement), S61-S67. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/i.iadohealth.2013.11.021
Smiley, A., Persaud, B., Bahar, G., Mollet, C., Lyon, C., Smahel, T., & Kelman, L. (2005). Traffic safety evaluation of video advertising signs. Transportation Research Record, 1937, 105- 112.

Stavrinos, D., Mosley, P. R., Wittig, S. M., Johnson, H. D., Decker, J. S., Sisiopiku, V. P., & Welburn, S. C. (2016). Visual behavior differences in drivers across the lifespan: A digital billboard simulator study. Transportation Research Part F. Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 41(PartA), 19-28. doi: https:Hdoi.org/10.1016/'.trf.2016.06.001 Stuss, D. T., Shallice, T., M. P, A., M.P., & Picton, T. W. (1995). A multidisciplinary approach to anterior attentional functions. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 769 (Structure and Functions of the Human Prefrontal Cortex), 191-212.

Tantala, M. W., & Tantala, A. M. (2010). A study of the relationship between digital billboards and traffic safety in Henrico county and Richmond, Virginia; A study commissioned by the Foundation for Outdoor Advertising Research and Education (FOARE) 1850 m street, nw, suite 1040 Washington, DC 20036-5821. Retrieved from Philadelphia:
httr):// www.ohiooutdoor.org/wp-content/uploads/201 1/01 /TSA-Richmond-2010. pdf Trent, V., Dozza, M., Bargman, J., Boda, C.-N., Engstrom, J., Flannagan, C., ... Markkula, G. (2015). Analysis of Naturalistic Driving Study Data: Safer Glances, Driver Inattention, and Crash Risk (SHRP 2 Report S2-S08A-RW-1). Retrieved from Washington D.C:
http://onlinei)ubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/shrp2/SHRP2prepubS08AReport.pdf Underwood, G., Chapman, P., Brocklehurst, N., Underwood, J., & Crundall, D. (2003). Visual attention while driving: sequences of eye fixations made by experienced and novice drivers. Ergonomics, 46(6), 629-646.

Wachtel, J. (2015). A peer -reviewed critique of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) report titled: "Driver visual behavior in the presence of commercial electronic variable message signs (CEVMS)". Retrieved from Berkeley, California:
http://scenic.org/storage/PDFs/veridian` /`20fhwa%20review. pdf Y 39
C E^D R
yr Conference Eu peenne
J tles Directeurs des Routes
Conference of European
Directors of Roads
-521-

CEDR Call 2016: Safety
Wachtel, J. (2016). Compendium of Recent Research Studies on Distraction from Commercial Electronic Variable Message Signs (CEVMS). Retrieved from Berkeley, California:
http://www.kverulant.org/upload/kc/files/Konec%20d6lni6nich%20billboard6/studie° /o20o`/0 20vlivu%20billboardu%20na%20nezpe6nost%200nor%202016.pdf Wallace, B. (2003a). Driver distraction by advertising: genuine risk or urban myth? Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, ME3, 185-190.

Wallace, B. (2003b). External to vehicle driver distraction (168/2003). Retrieved from Edinborough: http://www.gov.scot/Resource/Doc/47133/0029641.pdf Werneke, J., & Vollrath, M. (2012). What does the driver look at? The influence of intersection characteristics on attention allocation and driving behavior. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 45, 610-619. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/'.aap.2011.09.048 Wickens, C. D. (2008). Multiple Resources and Mental Workload. Human Factors, 50(3), 449- 455. doi: https:Hdoi.org/10.1518/001872008X288394
Wickens, C. D., Helleberg, J., Goh, J., & Horrey, W. J. (2001). Pilot task management: testing an attentional expected value model of visual scanning. Technical Report ARL-01-14/NASA- 01-7.
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/31 b2/24a9e54431 faf52cec4a257b44252e7339a3.pdf Wickens, C. D., & Horrey, W. J. (2008). Models of attention, distraction, and highway hazard avoidance. In M. A. Regan, J. D. Lee, & K. L. Young (Eds.), Driver distraction: Theory, effects, and mitigation (pp. 57-69). Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group.

Yannis, G., Papadimitriou, E., Papantoniou, P., & Voulgari, C. (2013). A statistical analysis of the impact of advertising signs on road safety. International Journal of Injury Control and Safety Promotion, 20(2), 111-120. doi: https:Hdoi.org/l0. 1080/17457300.2012.686042 Young, K. L., Stephens, A. N., Logan, D. B., & Lenne, M. G. (2017). Investigating the impact of static roadside advertising on drivers' situation awareness. Applied Ergonomics, 60, 136- 145. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/'.apergo.2016.11.009 Young, M. S., Mahfoud, J. M., Stanton, N. A., Salmon, P. M., Jenkins, D. P., & Walker, G. H. (2009). Conflicts of interest: The implications of roadside advertising for driver attention.

Transportation Research Part F. Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 12(5), 381-388. doi:
https:Hdoi.org/l 0. 101 6/i.trf.2009.05.004
Zalesinska, M. (2018). The impact of the luminance, size and location of LED billboards on drivers' visual performance —Laboratory tests. Accident Analysis & Prevention. doi:
https://doi.org/l 0.1016/i.aap.2018.02.005
Ziakopoulos, A., Theofilatos, A., Papadimitriou, E., & Yannis, G. (2017). Driver distraction without presence of secondary tasks: Inattention, cognitive overload and factors outside the vehicle — an overview. Paper presented at the Road Safety & Simulation International Conference 2017 (RSS2017), The Hague.
40 �3 aCE -D� R
Conference Europeenne
re� PP des Directe—des Routes
Conference of European
Directors of Roads
-522-

Available online at www.CivileJoumal.org
1 Civil Engineering journal
© (E-ISSN: 2476-3055; ISSN: 2676-6957)
Vol. 8, No. 02, February, 2022
Effect of Distracting Factors on Driving Performance: A Review Neero Gumsar Sorum I% Dibyendu Pal
'Assistant Professor, Depailment of Civil Engineering, North Eastern Regional Institute of Science and Technology (NERIST), Nii j:di, Arunachal Pradesh-791109,India.

Received 10 December 2021; Revised 18 January 2022; Accepted 26 January 2022; Published 01 February 2022 Abstract
The number of traffic accidents because of distracted driving is increasing rapidly worldwide. Hence, the main objective of the present study is to review the effects of different distracting factors on driving performance indicators. Distracting factors considered in this study are roadside advertisements (billboards), mobile use, in-built vehicle systems, and sleepiness; and driving performance indicators are lane deviation, reaction time, and speed variation. Studies from existing literature reveal that all the distracting factors distract drivers from forwarding roadways in many ways. The location and content displayed on the billboard and the use of mobile phones increase reaction time. However, the former decreases the driver's ability to control the vehicle, and the latter increases the speed variation and reduces lane -keeping capacity. Lateral vehicle control and reaction time are compromised when drivers engage in searching for songs or videos on music players.

When sleepiness occurs, drivers exhibit a higher standard deviation of speed and a decreased headway distance.

Nevertheless, most of the studies in this area are carried out in developed countries like the USA and European countries.

Therefore, a detailed study and further research in developing countries like India, where activities like installing billboards and mobile phone use are increasing day by day due to the rapid urbanization of major cities in the country, are quite essential.

Keym•ords: Driving Performance; Distracting Factors; Road Safety; Billboard; Mobile Use; In -Built Vehicle System; Sleepiness.

1. Introduction
According to the World Health Organization (W.H.0) (2018) [1], road traffic crashes cause 1.35 million deaths each year, making them the eighth highest cause of mortality for individuals of all ages worldwide. Distraction while driving is considered a severe and growing concern that poses a hazard to road traffic safety (W.H.O, 2018). Distraction has been defined in several ways over the years. Still, the most widely accepted definition is a "diversion of attention away from activities critical for safe driving towards a competing activity, which may result in insufficient or no attention to activities critical for safe driving" [2]. It can deteriorate driving performance visually (not looking at the road), cognitively (not paying attention to the road), and physically (hands off the steering wheel) [3, 4]. Distracted driving occurs when the primary task (driving) is shared with a non -driving related secondary task. It was observed that the co - occurrence of distracted driving with other driving behaviors or secondary tasks increased the probability of near -crash and crash events [5]. Two general categories of the non -driving related secondary tasks are internal (such as mobile phone use, etc.) and external (e.g., looking at roadside advertising signs, etc.) [6].

Recently, there has been a great effort to research how and why road traffic accidents increase due to distracted driving. This article studies the literature on the relationship between distracting factors and driving performance. * Corresponding author: [email protected]
d lrttp://dx.doi.org/l0.28991/CEJ-2022-08-02-014
O © 2022 by the authors. Licensee C.E.J, Tehran, Iran. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC -BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . 382
-523-

Civil Engineering Journal Vol. 8, No. 02, February, 2022 However, there is a broad range of distracting factors affecting driving performance. In recent decades, many researchers have shown that distracting factors such as roadside advertisements, mobile phone use, in-built vehicle technology, and sleepiness are associated with higher crash risk [7-9]. Hence, a detailed study has been carried out on these four distracting factors.

This study presents the effect of four distracting factors (roadside advertisement, mobile use, in-built vehicle system, and sleepiness) on driving performance (lateral and longitudinal control of vehicle, eye fixation, response time, gap acceptance, and workload). In the following sections (sections 2-5), previous work on the factors mentioned above in the context of different driving performance measures is reviewed. The summary and future research directions are discussed in section six, followed by the conclusions in section seven. Finally, a summary of the studies, the data, and key findings on the four aforementioned distracting factors is presented in Tables Al to A4 in Appendix I.

2. Roadside Advertisement/Billboard
The main aim of installing roadside advertisements along roadways is to attract the attention of the road users as much as possible. This provides a massive benefit to the advertisers [10]. In professional literature, roadside advertisements, roadside advertising signs, and billboards are used interchangeably. Billboard is defined as "any off - premises external -to -vehicle advertising sign that is permanently constructed along a roadway and conveys visual information" [II]. Roadside advertisements/billboards and external distractors are being employed more than ever before due to improved technology and the significance of commercials in society. However, billboards, more than other external elements, can endanger traffic safety because of their enticing character [12]. In other words, these billboards can influence a variety of driving performances, such as response time, vehicle lateral control, and situation awareness, posing a risk to road safety [13]. Specifically, these billboards may divert driver attention away from the road ahead, hinder visibility at intersections, pose a physical hazard to the vehicle that deviates from the route, or obstruct attention to formal traffic signs [14].

Billboard presence demonstrated a detrimental effect on numerous driving performance measures and increased the risk of a crash [15-17]. Young et al. (2009) [18] studied the effect of billboards on driving performance under three different roadway conditions: rural, urban, and motorways. The results revealed that vehicle lateral control decreased significantly in the presence of billboards for motorways and rural roads. Similarly, Bendak and Al-Saleh (2010) [15] also observed that roadways with billboards induced more lateral deviations and instances of carelessly crossing risky junctions when compared to road stretches without billboards. Edquist et al. (2011) [19] used ISO standardized Lane Change Test to investigate the level of distraction induced by billboards, and they reported that billboards distracted drivers' eyes away from the road ahead and caused a 0.5 to 1-second delay in responding to traffic signs, increasing the incidence of driver errors. According to Herrstedt et al. (2013) [16], billboards captured drivers' attention to the point where they affect driving performance measures and road traffic safety. They reported that the safety buffer (the time required by the driver to respond to a sudden dangerous situation that requires immediate action to avoid an accident) to the vehicle ahead is less than 2 seconds for about 25% of the glances and less than 1.5 seconds for 20% of the advertising glances. Belyusar et al. (2016) [7] observed that drivers were distracted by the presence of digital billboards because they spent a significantly larger portion of time staring off -road when digital billboards were visible. The results of the study reported that several glances in the direction of billboards lasted longer than 2 seconds. This could increase the chance of crash occurrence, as past research found that off -road glance time longer than 2 seconds doubled the likelihood of near -collisions and crashes [20]. Recently, Meuleners et al. (2020) [8] found that the vehicle's lane position and speed were more variable in a roadway with a billboard when compared to a street without a billboard. Furthermore, drivers in the vicinity of billboard spent more time in high -risk headways of 2 seconds and very high -risk headways of

0.25 seconds than in an area without billboard, front, suggesting that billboard may increase crash risk.

The previous studies found that the impact of billboards on driving performance varies depending on the billboards' and drivers' characteristics [6, 21, 221. Characteristics of the billboard include the type of display [11, 23, 24], the content of the display [25-28], and the level of illumination [29, 30]. Driver characteristics includes age [31-33], and gender [31, 32, 341. The impact can also vary with respect to the placement/locations of billboards [8, 17, 21 ] and environmental conditions [32, 351.

2.1. Types of Display
Static and digital (also known as electronic) billboards were commonly used in the literature [6] for studying their effect on driving performance. Static billboards convey a single image and are passive in nature. On the other hand, digital billboards display numerous images that alter at specified times and are active in nature [l I]. Other types of advertising signs are less commonly included in the literature, like video -based signs, Light Emitting Diode (LED) signs, 3D signs, etc. Recently, the use of business -logo signs on highways has been increasing, which has captured the attention of scientific researchers. Generally, these signs do not seem to affect driver visual behaviors [36, 37], though speed is reduced while viewing nine -panel signs in comparison to six -panels [38]. 383
-524-

Civil Engineering Journal Vol. 8, No. 02, February, 2022 When comparing the effects of static and digital billboards on driving performance, it was observed that digital billboards caused drivers to be more distracted than static billboards [39-41]. In a naturalistic study, Beijer et al. (2004) [23] focused on the glance behavior of twenty drivers at different billboards along a Toronto expressway in Canada.

They observed that the number of glances for digital billboards was significantly higher than static billboards. The number of average glance durations for digital billboards was also higher than for static billboards. In another naturalistic study, Dukic et al. (2013) [35] looked at gaze patterns of forty-one Swedish drivers considering four digital billboards, seven traffic signs, and one traditional billboard. When compared to other road signs, the authors found that digital billboards caused drivers to become more distracted by garnering more and longer stares. During the day, drivers spent an average of 2.25 seconds fixating on electronic billboards, compared to 0.87 seconds for other traffic signs. In a simulation study, Stavrinos et al. (2016) [24] investigated the visual behavior of drivers using two types of digital billboards (250-foot and 500-foot digital billboards) and traditional billboards. They observed that digital billboards took drivers' eyes more away from the roadway when compared to traditional billboards. It was also observed that the 500- foot digital billboards took more driver's attention than the other types of billboards. In a similar study, Milloy and Caird (2011) [40] found that more collisions occurred in the presence of video billboards than in the presence of static billboards or the absence of billboards. When drivers saw video billboards, they were reported to take longer to apply the lead vehicle brake, compared with that while crossing static billboards or no billboard at all.

2.2. Content of Billboard
The emotional and arousal content of the billboards can influence driver behavior. For example, Megias et al. (2011) [42] looked into the impact of billboard emotional content on the alteration of driver attention in a high -risk driving situation. Negative and positive emotional commercials were found to evoke more fixations and total fixation time than neutral advertisements. Furthermore, drivers took a long time to gaze in case of negative billboards when compared to positive and neutral billboards, resulting in more glances away from the road as a result of this attentional catch. Trick et al. (2012) [27] displayed images on a dashboard -embedded screen, and participants were made to respond (using a button press) as to whether the image was positive or negative in valence. They observed that positive contents were linked to better vehicle steering control than negative contents, especially when both arousal levels were low. Chan & Singhal (2013) [25] explored the ability of emotional content on billboards to distract drivers and found that the presence of bad emotional phrases reduced the speed of the vehicle and slowed reaction times in comparison with positive emotional phrases. In another simulation research, the same authors reported that emotion -related auditory distraction can affect driver focus whether the emotional content is negative or positive. On comparison to distractions due to positive and neutral content on billboards, negative distractions had more detrimental effects on lateral control and speed of the vehicle [26]. Recently, Walker & Trick (2019) [28] observed that the driver could be distracted by the emotional content of roadside images displayed on billboards, even if drivers were not compelled to look at the images. It was reported that the emotional (positive high -arousal and negative low -arousal) content of the billboard caused the greatest variation in steering in the 50-meter period following a billboard. Maliszewski et al. (2019) [43] conducted three studies in which drivers were generally found to be very sensitive in the presence of erotic content billboards. The results of study I (nationwide survey) revealed that polish drivers considered sexual information on roadside advertising to be distracting and perilous. According to the Attentional-Network test (study -II), response time was extended in cognitive tasks due to the presence of sexual information on roadside advertisements. In the simulation study (Study -III), the authors observed driving fluency being disrupted in the presence of a roadside advertisement containing sexual content.

The reason for this could be that drivers' attention was diverted away from the road due to the presence of such advertisement, resulting in the driver losing lateral control and speed of the vehicle.

Some studies showed increased reaction time and reduced cognitive resources when participants were presented with digital billboards that display longer slogans. Harasimczuk et al. (2021) [44] observed that participants' driving performance was found to be lower in the case of longer slogan condition when compared to short -slogan one.

Additionally, Schieber et al. (2014) [45] found that drivers experienced greater variation in steering and longer gaze durations when they were presented with eight or more words in digital billboards.

2.3. Level of Illumination
Despite limited research connecting illumination levels to impaired driving performance, Zalesinska (2018) [30] reported that those billboard surfaces with a size of over 0.584.38m and brightness of more than 400 cd/m2 were negatively related to the visual performance of drivers. Domke et al. (2011) [46] affirmed the presence of high luminance billboard surfaces in the presence of low luminance in the vicinity of billboards. The presence of such billboards distracted drivers and impaired driving performance. High luminance of LED billboards against a low background luminance and high contrast of dynamically changing images were found to increase driver gaze duration and affect the visual perfection of the driver.

Recently, Tomczuk et al. (2020) [29] conducted pilot field studies to determine whether excessive brightness of media is a problem in Poland country and what percentage of media is affected. The light parameters (carrier luminance, 384
-525-

Civil Engineering Journal Vol. 8, No. 02, February, 2022 background luminance, and contrast) and geometric dimensions of 227 billboards' surfaces were measured. The study revealed that the permissible brightness levels were frequently exceeded in LED billboards. It was reported that the light coming from billboards (TVs with LED light sources with high illuminance values of 4000 to 7000 cd/m2 and 1000 to 4000 cd/m2 for 15 media and 19 media respectively) becomes brighter, causing higher distraction and posing a potential threat to the drivers. This negative effect was multiplied when digital billboards were installed. To avoid distraction, they also suggested that the medium's brightness should be adjusted to match the brightness of the environment where it was used.

2.4. Location/Placement of Billboard
Wallace (2003) [22] suggested that there were two specific situations where billboards could function as distractors:
at junctions and on long monotonous roads (such as motorways). The billboards on curves were particularly problematic because they had the potential to be distracting in a situation where the cognitive load was high [47], and the billboards should be avoided at dangerous bends and intersections (or nearby) [15, 48]. According to Mollu et al. (2018) [17], installing digital billboard signs near already attention -demanding locations, such as pedestrian crossings should be avoided. They found that in a retail zone roadway, there were more eye glances than in a built-up area roadway.

Sheykhfard & Haghighi (2019) [32] found that having a long sight distance to view digital billboards and having digital billboards installed at road intersections and verges increased the likelihood of driver distraction.

Crundall et al. (2006) [21 ] used driving videos to compare two different billboard types placed in different locations and investigated the glance and gaze behaviors of drivers. SLB (short level billboard) and RLB (3m raised level billboard) were the two types of billboards. The authors observed that SLBs received the highest number of fixations when drivers were only looking for threats and the fewest number of fixations when they were instructed to look for billboards. In addition, SLBs had longer fixations than RLBs. Beijer et al. (2004) [23] found that billboard placed in the centerline of view attracts more attention, no matter how far their distance from the road. Targosinski (2017) [49] confirmed this finding, observing that if the billboard was close to the centerline of the driver's view - and if it was appealing to drivers - it was watched more frequently. Herrstedt et al. (2017) [39] observed that billboards, which were placed in such a way that they appear centrally in the visual field of the drivers, drew more attention. The results of the study carried out by Meuleners et al. (2020) [8] revealed an unexpected finding: drivers were less distracted by billboards on the edge of the road than by billboards immediately above the road. Billboards directly above the road are thought to be less distracting because they do not force the driver to glance away from the street ahead.

2.5. Driver Characteristics (Age and Gender)
Many researchers examined the relationship between driver characteristics (age and gender) and the effect of billboards [11], and most of the studies had shown mixed results. According to some studies, the presence of billboards had a negative impact on younger drivers. For example, in an early review study, Farbry et al. (2001) [50] observed that young drivers took a longer time to detect hazards, especially if the hazard is distant or emerging, in the presence of billboards. Stavrinos et al. (2016) [24] revealed that compared to both middle (35-55 years) and older (�65 years) age groups, young drivers (16-19 years) had more and longer glances at all billboard types. Older drivers, on the other hand, spent more time looking at static billboards than they did at other types of billboards. Olejniczak-serowiec et al. (2017) [51 ] found that a higher level of distraction due to billboards was found among novice drivers. Sheykhfard & Haghighi (2019) [32] found that young and novice drivers (—< 30 years) have a higher distraction in the presence of digital billboards than older drivers (: 60 years). In contrast, Edquist et al. (2011) [19] observed that old age drivers exhibited more lane change errors when compared to young -aged (18-25 years) and middle-aged (26-55 years) drivers, especially in the presence of billboards. Topolsek et al. (2016) [33] observed that drivers' age was not associated with the detection of the number of static billboards.

Olejniczak-serowiec et al. (2017) [31] reported that males get more distracted than females in the presence of billboards with sexual content. Sheykhfard and Haghighi (2019) [32] found that male drivers get more distractions due to digital billboards than female drivers. The underestimation of the hazardous effect of distraction on the likelihood of driving errors and higher risk -related behaviors among male drivers could be one explanation. In contrast, Misokefalou et al. (2016) [34] indicated that gender differences were not statistically significant.

2.6. Environmental Conditions
Some researchers have investigated the effect of billboards on drivers' visual performance under different environmental conditions. For example, Sheykhfard & Haghighi (2019) [32] conducted a naturalistic study to examine drivers' distraction behavior due to the presence of digital billboards in day and night environments. They observed that drivers were found to be more distracted at night and during foggy, snowy, cloudy, and rainy weather than during the day and when the weather was clear. The light from billboards becomes more visible in low -visibility conditions, causing drivers more distraction (more staring). However, Dukic et al. (2013) [35] showed no significant differences between daytime and night-time driving to digital billboards.
385
-526-

Civil Engineering Journal Vol. 8, No. 02, February, 2022

3. Mobile Phone Use
Ferdinand and Menachemi (2014) [52] observed that driving performance had a destructive relationship with secondary tasks like the use of the mobile phone. Recently, it was observed that the mere presence of mobile distracted drivers, especially those who were highly dependent on their mobile phones [53]. Distracted drivers exhibited significantly more driving errors, such as speeding and collision than those in the phone absent condition, irrespective of proximity to the phone and whether it was on or off [53]. The use of a cell phone while driving is one of the most distracting elements that can impair driving performance and raise the likelihood of a severe car crash [54-56]. In addition to talking, messaging, and searching for information, mobile phone use nowadays encompasses a wide range of activities, such as emailing, gaming, surfing social media, and listening to music. Chinese drivers' five most common tasks were surfing, talking, messaging, changing phone positions, and phone in hand [57]. The impact of all of these phone tasks on driving performance has resulted in varying degrees of driver distraction. Therefore, a deeper understanding of secondary phone tasks (such as texting, browsing, etc.) and their impacts on driver behaviors and driving performance is required. The review analysis of how driving performance measures (such as speed, lane change, headway) are affected by the use of secondary phone tasks (such as texting, dialing, conversing, etc.), demographic variables (such as age, gender, and driving experience), and driving context (such as road type and weather) is outlined below.

3.1. Various Types of Secondary Phone Tasks

3.1.1. Conversation
Benedetto et al. (2012) [58] used a simulation study to examine the effect of three types of phone handset use (Hand- held, hands -free, and hands -free voice) on driving performance measures (reaction time and longitudinal distance) under various road conditions (urban, rural, and motorway). They found that the reaction time of drivers increased while conversing, regardless of the handset types and urban roadway curvature. However, on rural roads, the reaction times did not alter considerably. In some situations (Hand-held along tangent and Hands -free voice along curve), they decreased whereas, on motorways, reaction times recorded in all types of mobiles were very similar to that of the control scenario for the tangent case while increasing for curve geometry. These results corroborated the findings of some studies [59-61 ]. Tomros and Bolling (2006) [61 ] observed that conversing drivers while driving on a rural roadway with a speed limit of 90km/h took longer to react than those driving on a low -complexity urban road with a 50km/h speed limit. After reviewing the findings of numerous studies, Caird et al. (2008) [59] observed that talking on a mobile while driving increased the reaction time of the drivers. They reported that the standard deviation exhibited variation from

0.17 to 0.31 seconds, and the mean increase in reaction time was slightly more than 0.2 seconds. In another simulation study, Haque and Washington (2014) [62] observed that drivers involved in a phone call lowered the vehicle speed faster and more promptly than the drivers who were not involved. Recently, the statistical results showed that secondary tasks such as mobile conversing, texting, and handling children, caused drivers to reduce their speed significantly, compared to the non -distracted condition [63].

Briggs et al. (2011) [64] observed that the degree of detrimental in driving performance depended on the type of conversation the drivers were having. The results reported that drivers who engaged in emotional conversation had a much higher cognitive task, made more driving errors, and had a considerable decrease in the range of their eye fixations, indicating a visual tunneling pattern. In a similar type of study, Dula et al. (2011) [65] observed that mobile phone use has a more detrimental effect on driving performance measures: an increase in the number of centerline crossings and speeding incidents, especially when the mobile conversation is emotionally intense and thus posing more dangerous driving. However, the study results of Garrison & Williams (2013) [66] and Reimer et al. (2014) [67] revealed that mobile -distracted drivers have less lane variation while conversing compared to non -distracted drivers. Some studies have shown that the change in lane position between phone and no phone conditions is insignificant (e.g., [68, 69]).

Choudhary and Velaga (2017) [70] investigated and modeled the effects of mobile talking and texting on Indian drivers' driving performance in terms of average speed and ability to avoid accidents. The authors found that while engaged in talking and texting tasks on the phone, drivers reduced their average speed by 2.62 m/s and 5.29 m/s, respectively, to compensate for the increased workload. It was also reported that talking on the phone or texting while driving increased the risk of a crash by three and four times, respectively [70].

Wang et al. (2020) [57] investigated the effect of mobile use on various driving performance measures in a naturalistic study. The authors found that during phone periods, the standard deviation of three performance measures (speed, lane offset, and headway) was considerably lower than during baseline periods. These results indicated the mobile -use drivers had less fluctuation in their driving when compared to non-use drivers. The finding on headway from this study was consistent with Metz et al. (2015) [71], who found an increase in headway while talking on the mobile phone.
386
-527-

Civil Engineering Journal Vol. 8, No. 02, February, 2022

3.1.2. Texting
Mobile texting had been the worst driving condition [72] because mobile texting required more visual demands than a mobile conversation [73]. Drivers involved in texting while driving were associated with more crashes than drivers not engaged in texting [74-76]. Kim et al. (2013) [77] conducted a simulation study in which drivers were asked to drive for 2 minutes with a constant distance and speed (80 km/h or 100 km/h). Drivers only drove for the first minute. For a further minute, drivers just drove or performed an activity (driving + SMS) while driving. They found that, even for very experienced taxi drivers over the age of 50, performing extra tasks in unforeseen scenarios reduced the smoothness or skill of the driving action and increased braking time response, affecting thus safe driving performance. The authors found that the braking reaction time of drivers while texting was significantly longer than that of drivers who drove only for both driving speeds. The 100 km/h braking time was considerably longer than the 80 km/h condition. Similarly, Drews et al. (2009) reported that drivers were 0.2 s slower to respond to brake application while driving + texting than under driving conditions only. He et al. (2014) [78] also observed that the braking reaction time of drivers who drove only was considerably shorter than that under the condition of handheld mobile phone use.

Alosco et al. (2012) [74] found that the drivers' texting group exhibited more middle line crossings than the drivers without texting. Also, more road edge excursion was observed in the drivers' texting group when compared to the eating group and control group. Stavrinos et al. (2013) [76] revealed that distracted drivers, particularly texting, exhibited more lane deviations and greater fluctuation in speed, affecting traffic flow. He et al. (2014) [78] found that lane deviation under the drive -only condition was considerably smaller than driving with mobile phone use condition. Rumschlag et al. (2015) [79] found that mobile texting significantly increased lane deviation in a driving simulator.

He et al. (2014) [78] observed that drivers exhibited a significantly higher standard deviation of speed while texting.

Recently, Morgenstern et al. (2020) [80] found that drivers reduced vehicle speed by 2 km/h when sending messages and picked up speed after completing the messaging task. This finding is consistent with the conclusion of Schneidereit et al. (2017) [81], who observed that drivers lowered their driving speed by about 0.50 km/h after starting messaging and increased their driving speed by about 1 km/h after they finished messaging.

Drews et al. (2009) [75] found that texting drivers exhibited larger variation in the following distance when compared to single -task drivers (driving only condition). The drivers involved in texting while driving sometimes increased their following distance and drove at a lower minimum following distance as compared to single -task drivers. In a simulation study conducted by Hosking et al. (2009) [82], drivers' variability in following distances to lead vehicles increased by up to 150 percent when they were texting messages while driving. Similarly, Choi et al. (2013) [83] also found that mobile phone use (e.g., messaging and searching direction) decreased the smoothness or skill of driving movement and increased vehicle's anterior -posterior and medio-lateral variability, impairing driving performance. Kim et al. (2013) [77] found that highly experienced taxi drivers exhibited increased horizontal variability of the vehicle while carrying out secondary tasks during unseen situations, resulting in more rear -end collisions with cars ahead. The results showed that the lateral variation in the driving with texting condition was considerably larger than that of the driving -only condition for both driving speeds. He et al. (2014) [78] observed that the standard deviation of gap distance for handheld phone use while driving was considerably more than that for hands -free phone use and drive -only conditions.

3.1.3. Answering
In a controlled laboratory experiment, Schattler et al. (2006) [60] found that the distractions produced by answering a call and conversing on a mobile phone considerably reduced driving performance. The findings revealed that when drivers used their cellphones while driving, average speeds were much slower, proportions of improper lateral placement were significantly greater, and the number of traffic crashes increased dramatically. Pouyakian et al. (2013) [84] observed that speed and headway were essential factors in deciding whether or not to accept or reject a phone call. When the headway distance was larger than 25 m, drivers were observed to receive phone calls more regularly than when the headway distance was 5 in and 15 in, respectively.

3.1.4. Browsing
Basacik et al. (2011) [85] observed that smartphone use for sending and receiving messages on social media increased reaction time by about 30%. It was also reported that drivers were unable to keep the vehicle at the centerline of the lane while browsing social media. Furthermore, it was also reported that the drivers drove at a more variable time headway because their ability to respond as rapidly to a leading car gradually altering speed decreased when browsing.

Mcnabb & Gray (2016) [86] also observed that messaging and surfing social networking sites on mobile have an adverse effect on driving performance. They observed that brake reaction times and time headway were significantly greater in the texting conditions as compared to both the social media browsing (Facebook, Snapchat, Instagram) conditions and the baseline. Similarly, Hashash et al. (2019) [87] observed that texting took longer reaction times than browsing social media. The authors showed no significant influence of texting and browsing on average lane position variation, contrary to Basacik et al. (2011) [85].
387
-528-

Civil Engineering Journal Vol. 8, No. 02, February, 2022

3.1.5. Dialing and Emailing
Xiong et al. (2015) [88] observed that drivers drove slower under sparse traffic conditions while involving visual - manual tasks like emailing and dialing compared to baseline conditions; however, the maximum speed of the distracted drivers was slightly higher in dense traffic conditions.

These tasks (such as reading, texting, conversation, browsing, and emailing) influence the driver's visual and manual distraction level. Visual distractions, commonly found in most drivers, are distractions that pull the driver's eyes and focus off from the roadway, even if just for a few seconds. Visual distraction is measured by eyes -off -road duration time (FORT), frequency of eyes -off -road glance (EORG), and total eyes -off -road time (TEORT). EORT is the portion of time in which driver's eyes are away from the road in front of them, and TEORT is total measurement. Manual distraction [89] is when a driver becomes busy while operating a mobile phone with one or both hands during driving.

In a quasi -naturalistic study, Owens et al. (2011) [90] observed that handheld texting diverted drivers' attention away from the road more regularly and for longer durations of time, compromising vehicle control when compared to the baseline condition. Mckeever et al. (2013) [91] illustrated that time required for mobile texting (118s) was almost twice the time taken by radio tuning tasks (the 60s) in a simulation study. It was reported that drivers get distracted for longer durations while messaging than when listening to the radio. Furthermore, a longer duration was observed in both 2- words and 5-words text messages, thus indicating an increased risk of distracted driving when texting. In another simulation study, Hashash et al. (2019) [87] found that secondary tasks such as messaging and surfing social networking sites significantly lowered visual focus on the road. Based on the number of fixations on the street, the results showed that drivers glanced away more from the road when surfing social media and much more when texting. Compared to no mobile use condition, a lower average fixation time during both texting and surfing indicated drivers had been no longer cognitively processing the surroundings and what's occurring in it as profoundly or very well during both conditions [871. The results of a case -cohort approach by Simons -Morton et al. (2014) [92] revealed that driver's eye glance away from the forward roadway while using phone operations (like talking, texting, dialing, reaching, etc.) increased the likelihood of a crash and near -crash occurrence.

In a naturalistic study, Fitch et al. (2015) [93] found that drivers' mean percentage of TEORT increased while using a hand-held phone for texting and decreased while using the same phone for conversation, demonstrating that drivers checked out the forward roadway extra frequently. Through a driving simulator experiment, Jeong & Liu (2019) [94] found that drivers exhibited longer and more frequent eyes -off -road behaviors (i.e., higher % EORG and % EORT) on curved roads while performing secondary tasks. The authors reported that the drivers on sharper curved roads while performing non -driving -related tasks gave more and longer attention to the forward streets. According to Wang et al. (2020) [57], surfing, talking, messaging, changing phone location, and phone in hand were accounted for 98.8 percent of all secondary phone tasks in the study. These tasks affected the performance of drivers visually and manually. With 5662 incidents of eyes -off -road and an average EORT of 3.16 s, ,which is comparable to 22.82 in of driving recklessly at a speed of 26 km/h, phone use increased visual distraction to a higher level. This distraction was exacerbated by manual distraction because 17 percent of mobile use time was spent with both hands [57].

Christoph et al. (2013) [95] observed that the average duration of a manually distracted driver while using a mobile phone (31.0 s, SD=15.5) was substantially longer than that of the drivers who used a navigation system (20.9 s, SD=

9.6). Kujala & Makela (2018) [891 assessed how many times the drivers touched their phones in an hour and found that the average speed varied depending on the number of touches and the type of road.

3.2. Types of Mobile Phone Handsets
Toreros & Bolling (2006) [61] found that conversation via handsfree phones was not safer than conversation via handheld phones. It was reported that drivers reduced driving speed in all situations while having a handheld phone conversation. However, handsfree phone conversations slowed them down only in rural 90 and urban complex scenarios.

This finding was in line with the results of Burns et al. (2002) [961 and Patten et al. (2004) [97] studies, who observed that driving speed reduced more when conversing with a handheld phone. One possible explanation is that drivers start underestimating the risk involved with a phone conversation when using a hands -free phone and thus do not adjust as much by reducing speed as they do when using a handheld phone. This finding was substantiated to some extent with the results of Benedetto et al. (2012) [58], who observed that minimum longitudinal distance (headway) between vehicles decreased under different types of roads (urban, rural, and motorways), especially if the mobile phone used was a hands -free type.

When a driver conversed with hands -free mobile, Saifuzzaman et al. (2015) [981 noticed a 0.33s increase in time headway and a 0.75s increase when a driver spoke with a handed phone. He et al. (2014) [78] found that driving performance was more impaired in the handheld texting condition when compared to speech -based texting condition.

They found that handheld texting increased braking reaction time and large fluctuation in lane position and gap distance.

Drivers who texted with a hand-held phone followed longer distances to the vehicle ahead and drove closer to the left 388
-529-

Civil Engineering Journal Vol. 8, No. 02, February, 2022 side of the lane boundary. Soccolich et al. (2014) [99] observed that drivers preferred to use handheld phones for conversation than hands -free phones because the drivers found hands -free phones to be less handy for secondary tasks like messaging and dialing. However, Ishigami & Klein (2009) [100] and Lipovac et al. (2017) [101] observed that performance measures while using a hands -free mobile were not notably better than those while using a handheld mobile. Similarly, Haque & Washington (2015) [62] observed insignificant variations in braking behavior between handed and hands -free mobile conditions. When approaching a pedestrian crossing, drivers who were distracted by handed mobile conversations required roughly 8% less time to reduce their starting speed to 20 km/h than drivers conversing with hands -free phones [62].

Fitch et al. (2013) [102] found that the drivers who used the handed phone while driving had more crash risk (RR =

1.73) than those drivers who used portable (RR = 1.06) or integrated (RR = 0.57) hands -free phones in on -road driving research. Li et al. (2019) [103] illustrated that drivers who used handheld mobiles took longer to apply brakes than those who used hands -free phones. They were also likely to be involved in a high crash risk group.

Some previous studies showed the effect of different mobile input interfaces on driving performance [67, 69, 104].

Reimer et al. (2014) [67] found that mobile with a keyboard interface had less influence on driving performance because tactile pushbuttons necessitate fewer looks away from the road. It was observed that the average number of looks longer than 1.6 seconds on the iPhone was 2.1 times that of the flip phone. Furthermore, it was found that the lane deviation was more significant when dialing the flip phone than when dialing the iPhone. Yannis et al. (2014) [104] found that crash probability increased for the drivers involved in texting with touch screen mobile phones while driving at a speed higher than the mean speed. However, Young et al. (2014) [69] observed that performance deteriorations were identical for both numeric keypad and touch screen phones.

3.3. Characteristics of Drivers (Age, Gender, and Driving Experience)

3.3.1. Age
Gras et al. (2007) [105] observed that younger drivers were involved more than older drivers in sending messages while driving. Lipovac et al. (2017) [101] conducted a literature review and found that younger male drivers used their mobiles more regularly while driving than women and older males. Tractinsky et al. (2013) [106] observed that experienced and older drivers initiated fewer phone calls when compared to young drivers because experienced drivers and older drivers were both sensitive to road type when initiating calls and to the context of the calls (incoming vs. outgoing). In contrast, Asbridge et al. (2013) [107] observed that mobile tasks less influenced younger drivers in terms of brake response time and cognitive deficiencies than older drivers. Compared to more experienced drivers, adolescent drivers were much less affected by texting distraction [79]. Liu & Ou (2011) [108] found that using hands -free mobile had a considerably significant impact on older drivers' performance (such as accuracy, reaction time, etc.) than younger drivers. Recently, it was observed that compared to the old group, distracted young drivers tend to drive comparatively faster and with smaller headway, consequently possessing a higher risk of an accident [63].

3.3.2. Gender and driving experience
Gender and driving experience were identified as significant driving performance indicators [76, 103, and 109]. In a field study, Hallett et al. (2012) [109] found that the average number of text messages sent by males while driving was higher than the numbers sent by female drivers. Compared to male drivers, Reimer et al. (2014) [67] observed that female drivers, who used flip phones, looked most of the time on the road and had a minimum probability of demonstrating long -duration off -road glances. Li et al. (2019) [103] observed that female and non-professional drivers had a higher probability of engaging in unsafe driving behavior than male drivers and professional drivers. However, the study carried out by Stavrinos et al. (2013) [76] revealed no significant variations in driving experience when involved in mobile phone use while driving. Rumschlag et al. (2015) observed that driver gender was not substantially connected with lane deviations while mobile texting.

3.4. Road Conditions and Environment
The impact of road and environmental factors on various driving performance measures was studied under different scenarios. The typical road conditions considered were urban roads, rural roads, and motorways, and environmental conditions were daytime and nighttime driving under clear and rainy weather. Yannis et al. (2014) [104] observed that mobile texting has an adverse effect on the driver's reaction time and speed of the vehicle on both urban and rural roadways in various weather situations. It was reported that speed reduction was higher on urban roads, and higher increased reaction time was on rural roads under all different environmental conditions (good weather, rainy condition, and night driving). Furthermore, compared to free driving, the risk of a crash was 2.9 times higher when reading the message and 8.3 times higher when writing a message on urban roadways. The respective crash probabilities for reading and writing messages were 1.4 and 1.5 times higher in the case of rural roads. Xiong et al. (2015) [88] observed that drivers were involved in fast driving during the day than at night, and they drove slower in medium traffic than in 389
-530-

Civil Engineering Journal Vol. 8, No. 02, February, 2022 scattered traffic scenarios when they were on the phone. Kujala & Makela (2018) [891 observed that drivers' mean speeds on highways were proportionately greater than that on major, minor, and urban roads when they were using their phones.

Christoph et al. (2019) [110] found that the duration of mobile phone use was substantially longer on motorways than that on rural roadways. It was also revealed that when a passenger was present, drivers utilized their cellphones less.

4. In -Built Vehicle Svstem
The automobile has seen significant improvements in recent years. Many in -car technologies, such as vehicle navigation systems, wireless Internet capability, wireless messaging, and audio systems, have been implemented by vehicle manufacturers. Although the expansion of new in -vehicle technologies is undoubtedly concerning, several studies have shown that these facilities simultaneously distract drivers and degrade driving performance [e.g., 111-113].

Drivers get distracted while driving and are involved simultaneously in the operation of in -vehicle devices such as radio/audio systems [114-1161, video/navigation systems [1151, and wireless internet systems [113].

It was observed that drivers performed different secondary tasks due to many in -vehicle devices, and they were related to either visual, auditory, manual, or cognitive distraction [117-120]. Eye glance is one of the most often utilized indicators to analyze the distraction effect of in -vehicle secondary tasks, as eye glance data offers crucial information for better comprehension of the mechanism of driver attention associated with distraction [121-1231. Glance distractions demand a driver temporarily divert their focus from the road and do some auxiliary tasks at this time [116]. Young et al. (2012) [124] investigated the effects of music tasks on driving performance using eye glance behavior. They observed that doing music searches while driving caused drivers to glance away from the road for longer periods. This finding was substantiated to some extent to the results of [125], who found that distractions were frequently linked to poor driving performance as evaluated by eyes directed inside rather than outside the car. Similarly, Xian & Jin (2015) [113] found that receiving and sending an e-mail on iPad4 while driving caused drivers to glance away from the road for longer periods and reduced the ability of the drivers to keep a steady lane position. Recently, Li et al. (2019) [103] used Eco-Safe Human -Machine -Interface in a simulation study to explore drivers' gaze behaviors as measures of the distraction of drivers. The results demonstrated that such a driving system increased the eco-safe driving behaviors of the drivers while causing no visual distraction.

Young et al. (2012) [124] observed that using an iPod touch screen interface to search for music reduced lateral vehicle control (I I I percent more lane excursions and 27 percent higher standard deviation of lane position). In a driving simulator study conducted in California, Salvucci et al. (2007) [126] observed a higher lateral lane deviation while engaged on music player tasks (like watching a video, selecting an item). However, the authors also reported no effect on lane position or vehicle speed while listening to songs. In a similar study, Crisler et al. (2008) [127] observed that the drivers struggled to keep their vehicles in proper lane position while controlling an iPod during driving. However, this iPod task caused significant variation in driving speed.

Furthermore, Chisholm et al. (2008) [128] found that the drivers had more substantial amounts of steering angle variability in the difficult iPod condition than in the baseline. This variation mainly occurred on freeways, followed by residential and urban roadways. Finally, Ma et al. (2018) [115] concluded that when driving task demands are high, all in -vehicle information systems, particularly the operation of visualized navigation systems and portable audio players, should be prohibited to reduce driver distraction. This is because the study's findings showed that if the visual scan range of the driver moves away from the road beyond a certain threshold, indicators of distraction, such as lane position deviation, lane departure, brake time, increase. Furthermore, they also concluded that in -vehicle distraction from 67% of the in -vehicle facilities was avoidable.

Choudhary & Velaga (2019b) [ I I I ] conducted a simulation study to examine the distracting effects of using a phone and a music player at unsignalized junctions to assess Indian drivers' driving performance. They observed that drivers' gap acceptance behavior deteriorated significantly due to the music player activities and that the results could be even worse because the drivers were unaware of the increased risk connected with the music player operation and did not compensate for the workload.

5. Sleepiness
Sleepiness/drowsiness is a typical symptom of sleep loss, which can be caused by acute or chronic, total or partial sleep deprivation, or interrupted sleep. Sleep deprivation has been linked to increased dangerous behavior, impaired decision -making, a decreased ability to adapt behavior quickly to changing environmental demands, and increased driver distraction during tedious work [129]. Sleepiness while driving increased the probability of a crash by 2.51 times [130].

Many researchers have examined the impact of the sleepiness factor on different aspects of driving performance, including Lateral position [131-1331; Speed [134-136]; Brake reaction time [137-1391, and Time headway [140-1421. 390
-531-

Civil Engineering Journal Vol. 8, No. 02, February, 2022

5.1. Lateral Position
Gillberg et al. (1996) [143] observed that professional drivers exhibited more fluctuation in lane position during night driving. Similarly, Lenne et al. (1998) [144] found that both professional and non-professional drivers' lateral positions of vehicles may be destabilized when they are drowsy. Sleepiness or fatigue increased to a higher level while driving on long monotonous roads/ long 'boring' stretches of road (such as motorways) [22]. Thiffault & Bergeron (2003) [132] used a steering wheel movement (SWM) analysis approach to analyze the effect of the monotony of roadside visual stimulation in a driving simulator study. They concluded that sleepiness caused drivers to respond slower to lane position deviations and with larger steering wheel movements. A similar finding was found in the study of Loon et al. (2015) [1451, who used a high-fidelity driving simulator with a monotonous (night time) driving task. The authors observed that drivers resorted to more severe steering wheel angles for higher levels of sleepiness when the lateral position deviated further from the driver's mean. Recently, it was observed that the standard deviation of lateral position was increased when drivers were sleepy and after sleep compared to when drivers were alert [146].

Philip et al. (2005) [147] found that sleep restriction impaired driving performance (vehicle lateral control) even though 8 hours of wakefulness and 105 minutes of driving times were both quite short. After sleep restriction, overall line crossing increased from 66 to 535 crossings (Incidence Rate Ratio = 8.1). Anderson & Horne (2013) [131] conducted a pilot study whereby participants were instructed to drive in a driving simulator for two h during the diurnal afternoon drive after a previous night's sleep restriction of 5h. They observed that driving in the afternoon after a previous night's sleep restriction of 5h increased distraction level, resulting in more driving mishaps with at least two wheels off the carriageway. Jackson et al. (2013) [138] investigated the effect of 27h total sleep deprivation on different aspects of driving performance. Subjects were instructed to drive in the middle of the left-hand lane for 30 minutes with a speed of 60 to 80 km/h on a continuous 2-lane highway with a series of straight and curvy highways in the AusEd driving simulation test. The study found that when compared to regular sleep, lateral lane deviation was significantly impaired after 27h sleep deprivation. The percentage increase in lateral lane deviation was 25% in the sleep deprivation condition. In another simulation study, Howard et al. (2014) [137] observed a continuous and considerable increase in lateral lane position after subjects had been awake for 17 to 24 hours. The lateral lane position fluctuated throughout the day, with more alteration in the early afternoon and a gradual decline after midnight. Professional and non-professional drivers showed no differences in performance changes. Williamson et al. (2014) [133] observed that sleepy drivers were more than 9 times more likely to cross a centerline than those who evaluated themselves as an alert. The result of Pack et al. (2006) [148] showed that short sleep duration impaired commercial drivers' driving skills (lateral vehicle control).

In contrast, Miyata et al. (2010) [139] found insignificant differences in the standard deviation of lane position for the road -tracking test and coefficient of variation of the car -following test between insufficient ( 8h sleep) conditions.

5.2. Speed
Jackson et al. (2013) [138] observed that speed variability was greatly affected following sleep deprivation compared to regular sleep in a simulation study. The percentage increase in speed variability was 43.4% after 27h sleep deprivation.

The study results by Howard et al. (2014) [137] revealed a considerable increase in speed variability on a simulated driving task after subjects had been awake for 17 to 24 hours. The speed of the vehicle fluctuated throughout the day.

There was a steady increase in speed variation after 17h of extended awake, with a 24.9 percent increase after 23h of awake compared to the first one. Professional and non-professional drivers showed no differences in performance changes. This finding was corroborated by Lenne et al. (1998) [144]. They observed that 36 hours of sleep deprivation severely impaired both inexperienced and experienced drivers' ability to keep a constant speed. The authors reported an increase in the standard deviation of the running speed when sleepiness occurred.

Aidman et al. (2018) [134] examined the effect of caffeine on the link between driving performance and sleepiness over a 50-hour sleep deprivation period. Subjects were asked to execute fifteen identical 40-minute driving assignments over the course of 50 hours and were advised to drive in the left lane at an average speed of 80 kilometers per hour.

Subjects were randomly divided into the caffeine group (who received four dosages of caffeine chewing gum every two hours) and the placebo group (who received no caffeine chewing gum). Driver's sleepiness level was measured through Johns Drowsiness Scale (JDS) score. They found that in the placebo group, speed variability (km/h) increased with increasing sleepiness level and that while the same pattern was observed initially (up to JDS= 5) in the caffeine group, the rate of speed variability was noticeably lower than in the placebo group, with a paradoxical decline in speed variability observed above JDS =5.

5.3. Reaction Time
In a simulation study, Lenne et al. (1998) [144] observed that when compared to experienced drivers, inexperienced drivers took a longer time to apply vehicle break-ins in both sleep -deprived and non -sleep -deprived conditions. Philip et al. (2005) [147] conducted a naturalistic study on an open French highway, in which 22 healthy French males were 391
-532-

Civil Engineering Journal Vol. 8, No. 02, February, 2022 instructed to drive five identical 200 km sessions with a constant speed of 130 km/h on separated lanes motorway for 105 minutes (each session). It was reported that sleepiness (sleep restriction) combined with fatigue increased the reaction time of drivers, which might increase distractibility and driving incidents. This finding was validated in Jackson et al. (2013) [138]. When participants were sleep -deprived, they were considerably slower to brake in reaction to approaching trucks. Miyata et al. (2010) [139] investigated the impact of insufficient sleep (less than 4 hours) on driving performance in nineteen healthy Japanese adults. They observed that in the harsh -braking test, the brake reaction time was considerably longer after insufficient sleep (less than 8 hours of sleep) than it was after sufficient sleep (> 8 hours of sleep). Furthermore, the authors reported that one night of insufficient sleep harmed the subjects' daily cognitive function and driving performance. Howard et al. (2014) [137] observed that drivers' response time to apply break increased in the Psychomotor Vigilance Task test after subjects had been awake for 17 to 24 hours.

5.4. Time Headway
In an epidemiological study, Akerstedt et al. (2001) [141] described that rear -end accidents occurred when the distance between two vehicles deteriorated due to falling asleep. The same result was found in a study conducted by Abe et al. (2010) [140]. Zhang et al. (2016) [142] investigated the performance of a driver's car -following behavior when drivers were under the influence of sleepiness or fatigue. They found that sleepy driving significantly affected performance measure time headway. The study results indicated that at high fatigue levels, drivers decreased headway distance, i.e., drivers followed the leading vehicle at a lower time headway, and the minimum time headway maintained during car following was also closer to the leading vehicle.

5.5. Duration of Driving Time
The duration of driving time was associated with impaired driving performance, leading to traffic accidents. Ting et al. (2008) [136] conducted a 90-minute simulator driving test in which participants were instructed to keep a constant speed of 100 km/h and car -following distance by 50 meters. The results of the study indicated that progressive increase in sleepiness due to long driving duration made the vehicular operation more unstable which, in turn, adversely affected driver control of steering and speed regulation. Further, the performance index score decreased over time, indicating that prolonged driving increased the likelihood of a crash. Furthermore, the authors observed that 80 minutes of monotonous highway driving was the safe limit. Sagaspe et al. (2008) [149] found that self -rated sleepiness score was positively connected with driving impairment in four hours and eight hours sessions in an actual driving experiment.

Inappropriate line crossings, in particular, increased with time as a result of continual actual driving. In another simulator study, Davenne et al. (2012) [150] concluded that inappropriate line crossing increased with the increasing duration of driving. In other words, the drivers had difficulty maintaining the vehicle in the right lane when sleepiness increased, mainly at the end of the 8-h driving session. Aidman et al. (2018) [134] found that in the placebo group, performance measures (lane keeping and speed maintenance) decreased with each subsequent drive, with a faster reduction within each drive. Compared to the placebo group, the caffeine group had a smaller decrease in lane maintaining and speed maintenance ability (both between and within drives).

Many previous studies had illustrated that sleep -related -driving causes deteriorations comparable to those caused by prescribed blood alcohol levels [ 151-1531. Davison & Reid (1997) [152], using a tracking task, established equivalences between decrements in performance produced by alcohol and by sustained wakefulness (sleep deprivation). They found that 17 hours of sleep deprivation resulted in cognitive, psychomotor performance (CPP) impairments comparable to those seen in 0.05 percent blood alcohol concentrations (BAC). CPP performance decreased to the same level as that of a 0.10 percent BAC after 24 hours of awake. Subsequent studies using psychomotor tests [ 155, 156], driving simulators [151], and closed -course driving [154] had confirmed these findings. Williamson & Feyer (2000) [155] observed how sleep deprivation and alcohol affected driving performance. Sleep deprivation of 17 to 19 hours had an impact on the performance that was comparable to or worse than when the blood alcohol level was 0.05 percent. Respondents who had consumed alcohol responded 50 percent slower, and accuracy was also worse. This finding revealed that driving performance, like speed, could be impaired by sleep deprivation. Arnedt et al. (2000) [151] observed that 20 hours awake and 0.08 percent BAC alcohol drinking resulted in identical magnitudes of impairment in simulated driving performance. It was also observed that combining prolonged wakefulness with alcohol use resulted in higher impairments in simulated driving ability than either condition on its own. Powell et al. (2001) [154] compared the risks of drowsy driving and alcohol -impaired performance. Although the study's overall findings could not be extrapolated, the model revealed that driving while sleepy poses a threat that was at least as harmful as driving while intoxicated.

Falleti et al. (2003) [157] investigated cognitive impairment after 24 hours awake and a blood alcohol concentration of

0.05%. They found that fatigue from sleep (24 hours of sustained wakefulness) had a greater impact on the speed of continuous attention, memory, and learning and the accuracy of complex matching than alcohol. These findings were in line with those of Lamond & Dawson (1999) [158], who found that exhausted drivers (those who had been awake for more than 22 hours) had a slower rate of continuous attention than those with a BAC of less than 0.05 percent. 392
-533-

Civil Engineering Journal Vol. 8, No. 02, February, 2022

6. Summary and Future Research Direction
Except for Megias et al. (2011) [42], who reported that static billboards with negative valence impaired the reaction time of motorcycle riders, all studies investigated the effect of different types of billboards on various driving performance measures using only one type of vehicle, namely, car. Therefore, further studies may be conducted on a variety of road users, such as motorcycle riders and pedestrians and their relationships. Further research can also be carried out considering environmental conditions and driver gender, as the results of available limited studies have shown conflicting results. Sheykhfard & Haghighi (2019) [32] observed that drivers were found to be more distracted at night and when the weather was not clear than during the day and when the weather was clear. Whereas the results of Dukic et al. (2013)'s [35] study showed minor variations between daylight and nighttime driving in the presence of digital billboards. Olejniczak-serowiec et al. (2017) [31] showed that men get more distracted than women in the presence of billboards with sexual content. In contrast, the results of Misokefalou et al. (2016)'s [34] study indicated that gender differences were not statistically significant.

Mobile -related tasks include conversation, texting, dialing, navigation, checking email, browsing social media, and playing music. Most of the studies focus mainly on conversation and texting tasks. The effects of ringing, browsing/internet, navigating, and dialing tasks on driving performance have received little attention. Further study is needed on the lateral lane position parameter of driving performance because most of the literature has shown conflicting and inconsistent results in the case of a phone conversation task. For example, some studies have shown less standard deviation of lane position [66, 671, some studies show more lane deviation [64, 651, and some results have shown a negligible difference in lane position [68, 69]. Due to the lack of consistent results and limited research on demographic variables (such as age, gender, and driving experience), there is an obvious need for more in-depth research considering various secondary tasks of mobile use. Although many studies have been conducted to investigate the impact of different road environments (such as rural, urban, freeway, day and night driving, clear and rainy weather) on distracted driving due to mobile phone use, specific driving contexts such as intersections need further research.

The results of many studies based on distracted driving due to in-built vehicle systems have shown consistent trends in terms of lane deviation, eye glance behavior, and reaction time. However, most of the studies considered in this review study have adopted the simulation (laboratory) approach. Despite its popularity in distraction -related research, the simulation study has some drawbacks in terms of ecological validity and driver arrangement. Therefore, it is suggested to carry out more research using the data collected through naturalistic studies to overcome these limitations.

Furthermore, while some research has focused on the effects on some driving performance measures (like reaction time and lateral control) [115, 124], research on other driving performance measures, such as headway and speed, is lacking.

This is an area that could be investigated further in the future.

The majority of previous studies have looked at the impact of distracted driving due to sleepiness factors on various driving performance parameters such as lane position, speed, time headway, and reaction time and have shown consistent results. But none of these studies considered in this review had examined the effect of the sleepiness factor on performance measures like gap acceptance and duration of eye closure. Therefore, considering these parameters using a naturalistic approach, further research can be conducted. Notably, more study is needed to evaluate the full effect of sleepiness on driving performance. In addition, the investigation may include a broader range of participants.

From the literature review, it is evident that many studies are from developed countries like the USA and European countries. It is yet to examine thoroughly the effect of these four distracting factors on driving performance in developing countries like India, where activities like installing billboards and mobile phone use population are increasing day by day due to the rapid urbanization of major cities of the country. Therefore, the studies may be carried out in this direction also. In addition to the above -mentioned distracting factors, other factors such as passengers' presence, alcohol, and drug consumption also need to be examined and reviewed.

7. Conclusions
Some of the key findings of this study are outlined below:
• Billboards' presence along roadways causes visual distraction to drivers, affecting driving performance. The drivers spent significantly more time staring off -road when the billboards were visible. Digital billboards cause drivers to be more distracted than static billboards. The location and content display on the billboard increase reaction time and decrease the driver's ability to control the vehicle. In addition, the driver's visibility decreases with an increase in the illumination level of the billboard. • Mobile phone use while driving (especially mobile texting tasks) causes cognitive distraction and visual -manual distraction for drivers, impairing driving performance, such as increased reaction time, reduced lane -keeping capacity, and higher speed variation. Generally, drivers reduce driving speed while performing any secondary tasks (texting, answering, browsing, dialing, etc.) using mobile and increase headway to compensate for the workload imposed by these tasks.
393
-534-

Civil Engineering Journal
Vol. 8, No. 02, February, 2022
• While performing in-built vehicle system tasks (such as searching for songs, listening to songs, and watching videos), drivers are involved in auditory distraction and manual distraction, which force them to glance away from the road for longer periods. Lateral vehicle control is compromised when drivers engage in searching for songs or videos on music players. The driver's gap acceptance behavior deteriorated significantly as a result of the music player's activities.
• Sleepiness causes drivers to respond slower to lane position deviations and larger steering wheel movements.

Drivers exhibited a higher standard deviation of speed and decreased headway distance when sleepiness occurred.

Further, the impact of sleepiness on driving performance is comparable to the decrements in performance produced by alcohol.

Overall, it is concluded that these distracting factors have a detrimental effect on driving performance.

8. Declarations

8.1. Author Contributions
Conceptualization, N.G.S.; methodology, N.G.S.; writing —original draft preparation, N.G.S.; -"Titing—review and editing, D.P.; supervision, D.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

8.2. Data Availability Statement
No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

8.3. Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

8.4. Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.

9. References
[1] World Health Organization (W.H.0). (2018). Global Status Report on Road safety 2018. Available online:
https://w,"ryv.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241565684 (accessed on December 2021). [2] Regan, M. A., Hallett, C., & Gordon, C. P. (2011). Driver distraction and driver inattention: Definition, relationship and taxonomy.

Accident Analysis and Prevention, 43(5), 1771-1781. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2011.04.008. [3] Bock, O., Stojan, R., Wechsler, K., Mack, M., & Voelcker-Rehage, C. (2021). Distracting tasks have persisting effects on young and older drivers' braking performance. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 161. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2021.106363. [4] Chaudhary, N. K., Casanova -Powell, T., Cosgrove, L., Reagan, I., Williams, A. (2014). Evaluation of NHTSA distracted driving demonstration projects in Connecticut and New York (No. DOT HS 811 635). National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, United States. Available online: https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/811635— eval_nhtsa_distracted_ driving_demo_proj_comm_ct_and_ny.pdf (accessed on December 2021). [5] Jazayeri, A., Martinez, J. R. B., Loeb, H. S., & Yang, C. C. (2021). The Impact of driver distraction and secondary tasks with and without other co-occurring driving behaviors on the level of road traffic crashes. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 153. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2021.106010.
[6] Oviedo-Trespalacios, O., Truelove, V., Watson, B., & Hinton, J. A. (2019). The impact of road advertising signs on driver behaviour and implications for road safety: A critical systematic review. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 122, 85-98. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2019.01.012.
[7] Belyusar, D., Reimer, B., Mehler, B., & Coughlin, J. F. (2016). A field study on the effects of digital billboards on glance behavior during highway driving. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 88, 88-96. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2015.12.014. [8] Meuleners, L., Roberts, P., & Fraser, M. (2020). Identifying the distracting aspects of electronic advertising billboards: A driving simulation study. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 145(105710). doi:10.1016/j.aap.2020.105710. [9] Seacrist, T., Douglas, E. C., Hannan, C., Rogers, R., Belwadi, A., & Loeb, H. (2020). Near crash characteristics among risky drivers using the SHRP2 naturalistic driving study. Journal of Safety Research, 73, 263-269. doi: 10. 10 16/j.jsr.2020.03.012. [10] Gitelman, V., Doveh, E., & Zaidel, D. (2019). An examination of billboard impacts on crashes on a suburban highway:

Comparing three periods —Billboards present, removed, and restored. Traffic Injury Prevention, 20(sup2), S69—S74. doi:10.1080/ 15389588.2019.1645330.
394
-535-

Civil Engineering Journal Vol. 8, No. 02, February, 2022 [I 1 ] Decker, J. S., Stannard, S. J., McManus, B., Wittig, S. M. O., Sisiopiku, V. P., & Stavrinos, D. (2015). The Impact of Billboards on Driver Visual Behavior: A Systematic Literature Review. Traffic Injury Prevention, 16(3), 234-239. doi: 10.1080/ 15389588.2014.936407.
[12] Plant, B. R. C., Irwin, J. D., & Chekaluk, E. (2017). The effects of anti -speeding advertisements on the simulated driving behaviour of young drivers. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 100, 65-74. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2017.01.003. [13] Young, K. L., Stephens, A. N., Logan, D. B., & Lenne, M. G. (2017). Investigating the impact of static roadside advertising on drivers' situation awareness. Applied Ergonomics, 60, 136-145. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2016.11.009. [14] Costa, M., Bonetti, L., Vignali, V., Bichicchi, A., Lantieri, C., & Simone, A. (2019). Driver's visual attention to different categories of roadside advertising signs. Applied Ergonomics, 78, 127-136. doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2019.03.001. [15] Bendak, S., & Al-Saleh, K. (2010). The role of roadside advertising signs in distracting drivers. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 40(3), 233-236. doi:10.1016/j.ergon.2009.12.001. [I6] Herrstedt, L., Greibe, P., & Andersson, P. K. (2013). Driver attention is captured by roadside advertising signs. In 16th International Conference Road Safety on Four Continents. Beijing, China. [17] Mollu, K., Comm, J., Brijs, K., Pirdavani, A., & Brijs, T. (2018). Driving simulator study on the influence of digital illuminated billboards near pedestrian crossings. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 59, 45-56. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2018.08.013.
[18] Young, M. S., Mahfoud, J. M., Stanton, N. A., Salmon, P. M., Jenkins, D. P., & Walker, G. H. (2009). Conflicts of interest: The implications of roadside advertising for driver attention. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 12(5), 381-388. doi:10.1016/j.trf.2009.05.004.
[19] Edquist, J., Horbeny, T., Hosking, S., & Johnston, I. (2011). Effects of advertising billboards during simulated driving. Applied Ergonomics, 42(4), 619-626. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2010.08.013. [20] Klauer, C., Dingus, T. A., Neale, V. L., Sudweeks, J. D., & Ramsey, D. J. (2006). The impact of driver inattention on near- crash/crash risk: An analysis using the 100-car naturalistic driving study data. Available online:
https://vtecliworks.lib.vt.edu/Iiandle/10919/55090 (accessed on January 2022). [21] Crundall, D., Van Loon, E., & Underwood, G. (2006). Attraction and distraction of attention with roadside advertisements.

Accident Analysis and Prevention, 38(4), 671-677. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2005.12.012. [22] Wallace, B. (2003). External -to -vehicle driver distraction. Development Department Research Programme Scottish Executive Social Research, Edinburgh, Scottish Government. Available online: http:/hvww.fordgreene.com/lit/sign/drfl68.pdf (accessed on January 2022).
[23] Beijer, D., Smiley, A., & Eizenman, M. (2004). Observed driver glance behavior at roadside advertising signs. Transportation Research Record, 1899(1899), 96-103. doi: 10.3141/1899-13. [24] Stavrinos, D., Mosley, P. R., Wittig, S. M., Johnson, H. D., Decker, J. S., Sisiopiku, V. P., & Welbum, S. C. (2016). Visual behavior differences in drivers across the lifespan: A digital billboard simulator study. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 41, 19-28. doi: 10. 10 1 6/j.trf.2016.06.00 1. [25] Chan, M., & Singltal, A. (2013). The emotional side of cognitive distraction: Implications for road safety. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 50, 147-154. doi: 10. 10 1 6/j.aap.2012.04.004. [26] Chan, M., & Singhal, A. (2015). Emotion matters: Implications for distracted driving. Safety Science, 72, 302-309. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2014.10.002.
[27] Trick, L. M., Brandigampola, S., & Enns, J. T. (2012). How fleeting emotions affect hazard perception and steering while driving: The impact of image arousal and valence. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 45, 222-229. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2011.07.006.
[28] Walker, H. E. K., & Trick, L. M. (2019). How the emotional content ofroadside images affect driver attention and performance.

Safety Science, 115, 121-130. doi: 10. 1016/j.ssci.2019.02.004. [29] Tomczuk, P., Chrzanowicz, M., & Jaskowski, P. (2022). Procedure for Measuring the Luminance of Roadway Billboards and Preliminary Results. LEUKOS - Journal of Illuminating Engineering Society of North America, 18(1), 2-20. doi:10. 1080/ 15 502724.2020.1803 752.
[30] Zalesinska, M. (2018). The impact of the luminance, size and location of LED billboards on drivers' visual performance - Laboratory tests. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 117, 439-448. doi: 10. 10 1 6/j.aap.2018.02.005. [31] Olejniczak-Serowiec, A., Maliszewski, N., & Zigtek, K. (2017). Social attitudes towards roadside advertising. MATEC Web of Conferences, 122, 03006. doi: 10.1051/matecconf/201712203006. 395
-536-

Civil Engineering Journal Vol. 8, No. 02, February, 2022 [32] Sheykhfard, A., & Haghighi, F. (2020). Driver distraction by digital billboards? Structural equation modeling based on naturalistic driving study data: A case study of Iran. Journal of Safety Research, 72, 1-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jsr.2019.11.002. [33] Topolsek, D., Areh, I., & Cvahte, T. (2016). Examination of driver detection of roadside traffic signs and advertisements using eye tracking. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 43, 212-224. doi:10.1016/j.trf.2016.10.002. [34] Misokefalou, E., Papadimitriou, F., Kopelias, P., & Eliou, N. (2016). Evaluating Driver Distraction Factors in Urban Motorways.

A Naturalistic Study Conducted in Attica Tollw•ay, Greece. Transportation Research Procedia, 15, 771-782. doi: 10. 10 16/j.trpro.2016.06.064.
[35] Dukic, T., Ahlstrom, C., Patten, C., Kermich, C., & Kircher, K. (2013). Effects of Electronic Billboards on Driver Distraction.

Traffic Injury Prevention, 14(5), 469-476. doi: 10.1080/15389588.2012.731546. [36] Kaber, D., Pankok, C., Corbett, B., Ma, W., Hummer, J., & Rasdorf, W. (2015). Driver behavior in use of guide and logo signs under distraction and complex roadway conditions. Applied Ergonomics, 47, 99-106. doi: 10. 10 16/j.apergo.2014.09.005. [37] Pankok, C., Kaber, D., Rasdorf, W., & Hummer, J. (2015). Effects of guide and logo signs on freeway driving behavior.

Transportation Research Record, 2518, 73-78. doi:10.3141/2518-10. [38] Zahabi, M., Machado, P., Lau, M. Y., Deng, Y., Pankok, C., Hummer, J., Rasdorf, W., & Kaber, D. B. (2017). Driver performance and attention allocation in use of logo signs on freeway exit ramps. Applied Ergonomics, 65, 70-80. doi: 10. 10 1 6/j.apergo.2017.06.00 1.
[39] Herrstedt, L., Greibe, P., Andersson, P., & la Cour Lund, B. (2017). Do LED -advertising signs affect driver attention. In 5th International Driver Distraction and Innatention (DDI) Conference, Paris, France. [40] Milloy, S. L., & Caird, J. K. (2011). External driver distractions: The effects of video billboards and wind farms on driving performance. Handbook of Driving Simulation for Engineering, Medicine, and Psychology, CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, New York, United States. doi:10.1201/b10836-17.
[41 ] Missokefalou, E., & Eliou, N. (2012). Recording and Evaluation Procedure of Drivers' Distraction: The Case of Thessaloniki Ring Road. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 48, 3159-3169. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.1282. [42] Megias, A., Maldonado, A., Catena, A., Di Stasi, L. L., Serrano, J., & Candido, A. (2011). Modulation of attention and urgent decisions by affect -laden roadside advertisement in risky driving scenarios. Safety Science, 49(10), 1388-1393. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2011.06.001.
[43] Maliszewski, N., Olejniczak-Serowiec, A., & Harasimczuk, J. (2019). Influence of sexual appeal in roadside advertising on drivers' attention and driving behavior. PLoS ONE, 14(5). doi:10.1371/joumal.pone.0216919. [44] Harasimczuk, J., Maliszewski, N. E., Olejniczak-Serowiec, A., & Tamowski, A. (2021). Are longer advertising slogans more dangerous? The influence of the length of ad slogans on drivers' attention and motor behavior. Current Psychology (Vol. 40, Issue 1, pp. 429-441). doi: 10.1007/s12144-018-9955-y.
[45] Schieber, F., Limrick, K., McCall, R., & Beck, A. (2014). Evaluation of the visual demands of digital billboards using a hybrid driving simulator. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 58, No. 1, pp. 2214-2218).

SAGE Publications, Los Angeles, United States. doi: 10.1177/1541931214581465. [46] Domke, K., Wandachowicz, K., Zalesinska, M., Mroczkowska, S., & Skrz}pczak, P. (2011). Digital billboards and road safety.

WIT Transactions on the Built Environment, 121, 119-131. doi: 10.2495/LIGHT110111. [47] Land, M. F., & Lee, D. N. (1994). Where we look when we steer. Nature, 369(6483), 742-744. doi: 10.1038/369742a0. [48] Molino, J. A., Wachtel, J., Farbry, J. E., Hermosillo, M. B., & Granda, T. M. (2009). The effects of commercial electronic variable message signs (CEVMS) on driver attention and distraction: An update (No. FF VdA-HRT-09-018). Tumer-Fairbank Highway Research Center (THFRC), Virginia, United States. [49) Targosinski, T. (2017). Preliminary simulation research of driver behaviour in response to outdoor advertisements. MATEC Web of Conferences, 122, 1-9. doi: 10. 105 1 /matecconf/201712203009. [50] Farbry J, Wochinger K, Shafer T, Owens N, Nedzesky A. (2001). Research review of potential safety effects of electronic billboards on driver attention and distraction. Office of Real Estate Services and Safety Core Business Unit Federal Highway Administration, Washington, United States. Available online: https:Hrosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/37216 (accessed on Jan 2022). [51] Olejniczak-Serowiec, A., Maliszewski, N., & Zigtek, K. (2017). Social attitudes towards roadside advertising. In editors. M. W.

C. In: Jamroz K Zukowska J (Ed.), MATEC Web of Conferences (Vol. 122, p. 3006). doi: 10.1051hnatecconf/201712203006. [52] Ferdinand, A. O., & Menachemi, N. (2014). Associations between driving performance and engaging in secondary tasks: A systematic review. American Journal of Public Health, 104(3). doi: I0.2105/AJPH.2013.301750. [53] Chee, P., Irwin, J., Bennett, J. M., & Carrigan, A. J. (2021). The mere presence of a mobile phone: Does it influence driving performance? Accident Analysis & Prevention, 159, 106226. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2021.106226. 396
-537-

Civil Engineering Journal Vol. 8, No. 02, February, 2022 [54] Lamble, D., Rajalin, S., & Summala, H. (2002). Mobile phone use while driving: Public opinions on restrictions. Transportation, 29(3), 223-236. doi: 10. 1 023/A: 10 15698129964.
[55] McEvoy, S. P., Stevenson, M. R., & Woodward, M. (2006). Phone use and crashes while driving: A representative survey of drivers in two Australian states. Medical Journal of Australia, 185(11-12), 630-634. doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.2006.tb00734.x. [56] Laberge-Nadeau, C., Maag, U., Bellavance, F., Lapierre, S. D., Desjardins, D., Messier, S., & Saidi, A. (2003). Wireless telephones and the risk of road crashes. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 35(5), 649-660. doi:10.1016/S0001-4575(02)00043- X. '
[57] Wang, X., Xu, R., Asmelash, A., Xing, Y., & Lee, C. (2020). Characteristics of driver cell phone use and their influence on driving performance: A naturalistic driving study. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 148(105845). doi:10.1016/j.aap.2020.105845.
[58] Benedetto, A., Calvi, A., & D'Amico, F. (2012). Effects of mobile telephone tasks on driving performance: A driving simulator study. Advances in Transportation Studies, 2012(26), 29-44. doi:10.4399/97888548465863.- [59] Caird, J. K., Wiliness, C. R., Steel, P., & Scialfa, C. (2008). A meta -analysis of the effects of cell phones on driver performance.

Accident Analysis and Prevention, 40(4), 1282-1293. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2008.01.009. [60] Schattler, K. L., Pellerito, J., McAvoy, D., & Datta, T. K. (2006). Assessing driver distraction from cell phone use: A simulator - based study. Transportation Research Record, 1980(1980), 87-94. doi: 10.3141/1980-14. [61 ] T6rnros, J., & Bolling, A. (2006). Mobile phone use - effects of conversation on mental workload and driving speed in rural and urban environments. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 9(4), 298-306. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2006.01.008.
[62] Haque, M. M., & Washington, S. (2015). The impact of mobile phone distraction on the braking behaviour of young drivers: A hazard -based duration model. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 50, 13-27. doi:10.1016/j.trc.2014.07.011.
[63] Gazder, U., & Assi, K. J. (2022). Determining driver perceptions about distractions and modeling their effects on driving behavior at different age groups. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering (English Edition), 9(1), 33-43. doi:10.1016/j.jtte.2020.12.005.
[64] Briggs, G. F., Hole, G. J., & Land, M. F. (2011). Emotionally involving telephone conversations lead to driver error and visual tunneling. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 14(4), 313-323. doi:10.1016/j.trf.2011.02.004. [65] Dula, C. S., Martin, B. A., Fox, R. T., & Leonard, R. L. (2011). Differing types of cellular phone conversations and dangerous driving. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 43(1), 187-193. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2010.08.008. [66] Garrison, T. M., & Williams, C. C. (2013). Impact of Relevance and Distraction on Driving Performance and Visual Attention in a Simulated Driving Environment. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 27(3), 396-405. doi: 10. 1002/acp.2917. [67] Reimer, B., Mehler, B., & Donmez, B. (2014). A study of young adults examining phone dialing while driving using a touchscreen vs. a button style flip -phone. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 23, 57-68. doi:10.1016/j.trf.2013.12.017.
[68] Cao, S., & Liu, Y. (2013). Concurrent processing of vehicle lane keeping and speech comprehension tasks. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 59, 46-54. doi: 10. 10 1 6/j.aap.2013.04.038. [69] Young, K. L., Rudin-Brown, C. M., Patten, C., Ceci, R., & Lenne, M. G. (2014). Effects of phone type on driving and eye glance behaviour while text -messaging. Safety Science, 68, 47-54. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2014.02.018. [70] Choudhary, P., & Velaga, N. R. (2017). Mobile phone use during driving: Effects on speed and effectiveness of driver compensatory behaviour. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 106, 370-378. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2017.06.021. [71] Metz, B., Landau, A., & Hargutt, V. (2015). Frequency and impact of hands -free telephoning while driving - Results from naturalistic driving data. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 29, 1-13. doi:10.1016/j.trf.2014.12.002.
[72] Leung, S., Croft, R. J., Jackson, M. L., Howard, M. E., & Mckenzie, R. J. (2012). A Comparison of the Effect of Mobile Phone Use and Alcohol Consumption on Driving Simulation Performance. Traffic Injury Prevention, 13(6), 566-574. doi:10.1080/ 15389588.2012.683118.
[73] Thapa, R., Codjoe, J., Ishak, S., & McCarter, K. S. (2015). Post and During Event Effect of Cell Phone Talking and Texting on Driving Performance -A Driving Simulator Study. Traffic Injury Prevention, 16(5), 461-467. doi:10.1080/ 15389588.2014.969803.
[74] Alosco, M. L., Spitznagel, M. B., Fischer, K. H., Miller, L. A., Pillai, V., Hughes, J., & Gunstad, J. (2012). Both Texting and Eating Are Associated With Impaired Simulated Driving Performance. Traffic Injury Prevention, 13(5), 468-475. doi:10.1080/ 15389588.2012.676697.
397
-538-

Civil Engineering Journal Vol. 8, No. 02, February, 2022 [75] Drews, F. A., Yazdani, H., Godfrey, C. N., Cooper, J. M., & Strayer, D. L. (2009). Text messaging during simulated driving.

Human Factors, 51(5), 762-770. doi: 10.1177/0018720809353319. [76] Stavrinos, D., Jones, J. L., Gamer, A. A., Griffin, R., Franklin, C. A., Ball, D., Welbum, S. C., Ball, K. K., Sisiopiku, V. P., & Fine, P. R. (2013). Impact of distracted driving on safety and traffic flow. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 61, 63-70. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2013.02.003.
[77] Kim, H. S., Choi, M. H., Choi, J. S., Kim, H. J., Hong, S. P., Jun, J. H., Tack, G. R., Kim, B., Min, B. C., Lim, D. W., & Chung, S. C. (2013). Driving performance changes of middle-aged experienced taxi drivers due to distraction tasks during unexpected situations. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 117(2), 411-426. doi:10.2466/22.25.PMS.117x23z6. [78] He, J., Chaparro, A., Nguyen, B., Burge, R. J., Crandall, J., Chaparro, B., Ni, R., & Cao, S. (2014). Texting while driving: Is speech -based text entry less risky than handheld text entry? In Accident Analysis and Prevention (Vol. 72, pp. 287-295). doi:10.1016/j.aap.2014.07.014.
[79] Rumschlag, G., Palumbo, T., Martin, A., Head, D., George, R., & Commissaris, R. L. (2015). The effects of texting on driving performance in a driving simulator: The influence of driver age. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 74, 145-149. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2014.10.009.
[80] Morgenstern, T., Schott, L., & Krems, J. F. (2020). Do drivers reduce their speed when texting on highways? A replication study using European naturalistic driving data. Safety Science, 128(104740). doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104740. [81] Schneidereit, T., Petzoldt, T., Keinath, A., & Krems, J. F. (2017). Using SHRP 2 naturalistic driving data to assess drivers' speed choice while being engaged in different secondary tasks. Journal of Safety Research, 62, 33-42. doi: 10. 101 6/j.jsr.2017.04.004. [82] Hosking, S. G., Young, K. L., & Regan, M. A. (2009). The effects of text messaging on young drivers. Human Factors, 51(4), 582-592. doi: 10.1177/0018720809341575.
[83] Choi, J. S., Kim, H. S., Kang, D. W., Choi, M. H., Kim, H. S., Hong, S. P., Yu, N. R., Lim, D. W., Min, B. C., Tack, G. R., & Chung, S. C. (2013). The effects of disruption in attention on driving performance patterns: Analysis of jerk -cost function and vehicle control data. Applied Ergonomics, 44(4), 538-543. doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2012.11.004. [84] Pouyakian, M., Mahabadi, H. A., Yazdi, S. M., Hajizadeh, E., & Nahvi, A. (2013). Impact of headway distance and car speed on drivers' decisions to answer an incoming call. Traffic Injury Prevention, 14(7), 749-755. doi:10.1080/ 15389588.2012.749464.
[85] Basacik, D., Reed, N., & Robbins, R. (2012). Smartphone use while driving: a simulator study. IHS Press, Virginia, United States.
[86] McNabb, J., & Gray, R. (2016). Staying connected on the road: A comparison of different types of smart phone use in a driving simulator. PLoS ONE, 11(2). doi:10.1371/joumal.pone.0148555. [87] Hashash, M., Abou Zeid, M., & Moacdieh, N. M. (2019). Social media browsing while driving: Effects on driver performance and attention allocation. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 63, 67-82. doi: 10. 1016/j.trf.2019.03.021.
[88] Xiong, H., Bao, S., Sayer, J., & Kato, K. (2015). Examination of driver's cell phone use behavior at intersections by using naturalistic driving data. Journal of Safety Research, 54(89), 89.e29-93. doi: 10.1016/j.jsr.2015.06.012. [89] Kujala, T., & Makela, J. (2018). Naturalistic study on the usage of smartphone applications among Finnish drivers. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 115, 53-61. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2018.03.011. [90] Owens, J. M., McLaughlin, S. B., & Sudweeks, J. (2011). Driver performance while text messaging using handheld and in - vehicle systems. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 43(3), 939-947. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2010.11.019. [91] McKeever, J. D., Schultheis, M. T., Padmanaban, V., & Blasco, A. (2013). Driver Performance While Texting: Even a Little is Too Much. Traffic Injury Prevention, 14(2), 132-137. doi: 10.1080/15389588.2012.699695. [92] Simons -Morton, B. G., Guo, F., Klauer, S. G., Ehsani, J. P., & Pradhan, A. K. (2014). Keep your eyes on the road: Young driver crash risk increases according to duration of distraction. Journal of Adolescent Health, 54(5 SUPPL.), S61-S67. doi:10.1016/j.j adohealth.2013.11.021.
[93] Fitch, G. M., Bartholomew, P. R., Hanowski, R. J., & Perez, M. A. (2015). Drivers' visual behavior when using handheld and hands -free cell phones. Journal of Safety Research, 54, 105.e29-108. doi: 10. 10 1 6/j.jsr.2015.06.008. [94] Jeong, H., & Liu, Y. (2019). Effects of non -driving -related -task modality and road geometry on eye movements, lane -keeping performance, and workload while driving. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 60, 157-171. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2018.10.015.
[95] Christoph, M., Van Nes, N., & Knapper, A. (2013). Naturalistic driving observations of manual and visual -manual interactions with navigation systems and mobile phones while driving. Transportation Research Record, 2365(2365), 31-38. doi:10.3141 /23 65-05.
398
-539-

Civil Engineering Journal Vol. 8, No. 02, February, 2022 [96] Burns, P., Parkes, A., Burton, S., Smith, R., & Burch, D. (2011). How dangerous is driving with a mobile phone? Benchmarking the impairment to alcohol. Media and Telecommunication Issues, 127-154, Nova Science publisher, New York, United States. [97] Patten, C. J. D., Kircher, A., Ostlund, J., & Nilsson, L. (2004). Using mobile telephones: Cognitive workload and attention resource allocation. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 36(3), 341-350. doi:10.1016/S0001-4575(03)00014-9. [98] Saifuzzaman, M., Haque, M. M., Zheng, Z., & Washington, S. (2015). Impact of mobile phone use on car -following behaviour of young drivers. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 82, 10-19. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2015.05.001. [99] Soccolich, S. A., Fitch, G. M., Perez, M. A., & Hanowski, R. J. (2014). Comparing Handheld and Hands -free Cell Phone Usage Behaviors While Driving. Traffic Injury Prevention, 15, S21-S26. doi: 10. 1080/15389588.2014.934958. [100] Ishigami, Y., & Klein, R. M. (2009). Is a hands -free phone safer than a handheld phone? Journal of Safety Research, 40(2), 157-164. doi:10.1016/j.jsr.2009.02.006.
[101] Lipovac, K., Deric, M., Tesic, M., Andric, Z., & Marie, B. (2017). Mobile phone use while driving -literary review.

Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 47, 132-142. doi:10.1016/j.trf.2017.04.015. [102] GregoryM. Fitch, Susan A. Soccolich, Feng Guo, Julie McClafferty, Youjia Fang, Rebecca L. Olson, Miguel A. Perez, Richard J. Hanowski, Jonathan M. Hankey, and T. a. D., Fitch, G. M., Soccolich, S. a, Guo, F., McClafferty, J., Fang, Y., Olson, R. L., Perez, M. a, Hanowski, R. J., Hankey, J. M., & Dingus, T. a. (2013). The Impact of Hand -Held And Hands -Free Cell Phone Use on Dining Performance and Safety -Critical Event Risk Final Report (Issue April). US Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, United States. [103] Li, X., Oviedo-Trespalacios, O., Rakotonirainy, A., & Yan, X. (2019). Collision risk management of cognitively distracted drivers in a car -following situation. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 60, 288-298. doi:10.1016/j.trf.2018.10.011.
[104] Yannis, G., Laiou, A., Papantoniou, P., & Christoforou, C. (2014). Impact of texting on young drivers' behavior and safety on urban and rural roads through a simulation experiment. Journal of Safety Research, 49(25), 25.e1-31. doi:10.1016/j. jsr.2014.02.008.
[105] Gras, M. E., Cunill, M., Sullman, M. J. M., Planes, M., Aymerich, M., & Font-Mayolas, S. (2007). Mobile phone use while driving in a sample of Spanish university workers. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 39(2), 347-355. doi:10.1016/j . aap.2006.08.006.
[106] Tractinsky, N., Ram, E. S., & Shinar, D. (2013). To call or not to call - That is the question (while driving). Accident Analysis and Prevention, 56, 59-70. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2013.03.017. [107] Asbridge, M., Brubacher, J. R., & Chan, H. (2013). Cell phone use and traffic crash risk: a culpability analysis. International journal ofepidemiology, 42(l), 259-267. doi: 10. 1093/ije/dysl 80. [108] Liu, Y. C., & On, Y. K. (2011). Effects of Age and the Use of Hands -Free Cellular Phones on Driving Behavior and Task Performance. Traffic Injury Prevention, 12(6), 550-558. doi:10.1080/15389588.2011.607197. [ 109] Hallett, C., Lambert, A., & Regan, M. A. (2012). Text messaging amongst New Zealand drivers: Prevalence and risk perception.

Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 15(3), 261-271. doi:10.1016/j.trf.2011.12.002. [110] Christoph, M., Wesseling, S., & van Nes, N. (2019). Self -regulation of drivers' mobile phone use: The influence of driving context. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 66, 262-272. doi:10.1016/j.trf.2019.09.012. [111] Choudhary, P., & Velaga, N. R. (2019). Gap acceptance behavior at unsignalized intersections: Effects of using a phone and a music player while driving. Traffic Injury Prevention, 20(4), 372-377. doi:10.1080/15389588.2019.1591619. [112] Dingus, T. A., Guo, F., Lee, S., Antin, J. F., Perez, M., Buchanan -King, M., & Hankey, J. (2016). Driver crash risk factors and prevalence evaluation using naturalistic driving data. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 113(10), 2636-2641. doi:10.1073/pnas.1513271113. [113] Xian, H., & Jin, L. (2015). The effects of using in -vehicle computer on driver eye movements and driving perfonnance.

Advances in Mechanical Engineering, 7(2). doi:10.1155/2014/981908. [114] Klauer, S. G., Guo, F., Simons -Morton, B. G., Ouimet, M. C., Lee, S. E., & Dingus, T. A. (2014). Distracted Driving and Risk of Road Crashes among Novice and Experienced Drivers. New England Journal of Medicine, 370(1), 54-59. doi:10.1056/nejmsa 1204142.
[115] Ma, Y., Hu, B., Chan, C. Y., Qi, S., & Fan, L. (2018). Distractions intervention strategies for in -vehicle secondary tasks: An on -road test assessment of driving task demand based on real-time traffic environment. Transportation Research Part D:

Transport and Environment, 63, 747-754. doi: 10. 10 1 6/j.trd.2018.07.005. 399
-540-

Civil Engineering Journal Vol. 8, No. 02, February, 2022 [116] Sodhi, M., Reimer, B., & Llamazares, I. (2002). Glance analysis of driver eye movements to evaluate distraction. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 34(4), 529-538. doi: 10.3758/BF03195482. [117] Oviedo-Trespalacios, O., Haque, M. M., King, M., & Washington, S. (2017). Self -regulation of driving speed among distracted drivers: An application of driver behavioral adaptation theory. Traffic Injury Prevention, 18(6), 599-605. doi: 10.1080/ 15389588.2017.1278628.
[118] Oviedo-Trespalacios, O., Haque, M. M., King, M., & Washington, S. (2017). Effects of road infrastructure and traffic complexity in speed adaptation behaviour of distracted drivers. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 101, 67-77. do i:10.1016/j . aap.2017.01.018.
[119] Oviedo-Trespalacios, O. (2018). Getting away with texting: Behavioural adaptation of drivers engaging in visual -manual tasks �vhile driving. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 116, 112-121. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2018.05.006. [120] Oviedo-Trespalacios, O., Haque, M. M., King, M., & Denunel, S. (2018). Driving behaviour while self-regulating mobile phone interactions: A human -machine system approach. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 118, 253-262. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2018.03.020.
[121] AhIstrom, C., & Kircher, K. (2017). Changes in glance behaviour when using a visual eco-driving system - A field study.

Applied Ergonomics, 58, 414-423. doi: 10. 10 1 6/j.apergo.2016.08.00 1. [122] Birrell, S. A., & Fowkes, M. (2014). Glance behaviours when using an in -vehicle smart driving aid: A real -world, on -road driving study. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 22, 113-125. doi:10.1016/j.trf.2013.11.003. [123] Kraft, A. K., Naujoks, F., W6rle, J., & Neukum, A. (2018). The impact of an in -vehicle display on glance distribution in partially automated driving in an on -road experiment. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 52, 40-50. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2017.11.012.
[124] Young, K. L., Mitsopoulos-Rubens, E., Rudin-Brown, C. M., & Lenne, M. G. (2012). The effects of using a portable music player on simulated driving performance and task -sharing strategies. Applied Ergonomics, 43(4), 738-746. doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2011.11.007.
[125] Stuffs, J., Feaganes, J., Reinfurt, D., Rodgman, E., Hamlett. C., Gish, K., & Staplin, L. (2005). Driver's exposure to distractions in their natural driving environment. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 37(6), 1093-1101. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2005.06.007. [126] Salvucci, D. D., Markley, D., Zuber, M., & Brumby, D. P. (2007, April). iPod distraction: Effects of portable music -player use on driver performance. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 243-250), New York, United States. doi: 10.1145/1240624.1240665.
[ 127] Crisler, M. C., Brooks, J. O., Ogle, J. H., Guirl, C. D., Alluri, P., & Dixon, K. K. (2008). Effect of wireless communication and entertainment devices on simulated driving performance. Transportation Research Record, 2069(2069), 48-54. doi: 10.3141/2069-07.
[128] Chisholm, S. L., Caird, J. K., & Lockhart, J. (2008). The effects ofpractice with MP3 players on driving performance. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 40(2), 704-713. doi: 10. 10 1 6/j.aap.2007.09.014. [129] MacLean, A. W. (2019). Handbook of behavioral neuroscience, Chapter 40-Sleep and Driving. Neuroscience, 30, 611-622. doi: 10. 10 16/B978-0-12-813743-7.00040-2.
[130] Bioulac, S., Micoulaud Franchi, J. A., Arnaud, M., Sagaspe, P., Moore, N., Salvo, F., & Philip, P. (2017). Risk of motor vehicle accidents related to sleepiness at the wheel: A systematic review and meta -analysis. Sleep, 40(10). doi: 10. 1 093/sleep/zsx 134. [131] Anderson, C., & Home, J. A. (2013). Driving drowsy also worsens driver distraction. Sleep Medicine, 14(5), 466-468. doi: 10.1016/j.sleep.2012.11.014.
[132] Thiffault, P., & Bergeron, J. (2003). Monotony of road enviromment and driver fatigue: A simulator study. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 35(3), 381-391. doi:10.1016/S0001-4575(02)00014-3. [133] Williamson, A., Friswell, R., Olivier, J., & Grzebieta, R. (2014). Are drivers aware ofsleepiness and increasing crash risk while driving? Accident Analysis & Prevention, 70, 225-234. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2014.04.007. [ 134] Aidman, E., Johnson, K., Paech, G. M., Vedova, C. Della, Pajcin, M., Grant, C., Kamimori, G., Mitchelson, E., Hoggan, B. L., Fidock, J., & Banks, S. (2018). Caffeine reduces the impact of drowsiness on driving errors. Transportation Research Part F:

Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 54, 236-247. doi:10.1016/j.trf.2018.01.008. [135] MacLean, A. W., Davies, D. R. T., & Thiele, K. (2003). The hazards and prevention of driving while sleepy. Sleep Medicine Reviews, 7(6), 507-521. doi:10.1016/SI087-0792(03)90004-9. [136] Ting, P. H., Hwang, J. R., Doong, J. L., & Jeng, M. C. (2008). Driver fatigue and highway driving: A simulator study.

Physiology and Behavior, 94(3), 448-453. doi: 10. 10 16/j.physbeh.2008.02.015. 400
-541-

Civil Engineering Journal Vol. 8, No. 02, February, 2022 [137] Howard, M. E., Jackson, M. L., Swann, P., Berlowitz, D. J., Grunstein, R. R., & Pierce, R. J. (2014). Deterioration in Driving Performance During Sleep Deprivation Is Similar in Professional and Nonprofessional Drivers. Traffic Injury Prevention, 15(2), 132-137. doi:10.1080/15389588.2013.800637.
[138] Jackson, M. L., Croft, R. J., Kennedy, G. A., Owens, K., & Howard, M. E. (2013). Cognitive components of simulated driving performance: Sleep loss effects and predictors. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 50, 438-444. doi: 10. 10 1 6/j.aap.2012.05.020. [139] Miyata, S., Noda, A., Ozaki, N., Hara, Y., Minoshima, M., Iwamoto, K., Takahashi, M., Iidaka, T., & Koike, Y. (2010).

Insufficient sleep impairs driving performance and cognitive function. Neuroscience Letters, 469(2), 229-233. doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2009.12.001.
[140] Abe, T., Komada, Y., Nishida, Y., Hayashida, K., & Inoue, Y. (2010). Short sleep duration and long spells of driving are associated with the occurrence of Japanese drivers' rear -end collisions and single -car accidents. Journal of Sleep Research, 19(2), 310-316. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2869.2009.00806.x.
[141] Akerstedt, T., Kecklund, G., & HSrte, L. G. (2001). Night driving, season, and the risk ofhighway accidents. Sleep, 24(4), 401- 406. doi:10.1093/sleep/24.4.401.
[142] Zhang, H., Wu, C., Yan, X., & Qiu, T. Z. (2016). The effect of fatigue driving on car following behavior. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 43, 80-89. doi:10.1016/j.trf.2016.06.017. [143] Gillberg, M., Kecklund, G., & Akerstedt, T. (1996). Sleepiness and performance of professional drivers in a truck simulator - Comparisons between day and night driving. Joumal of Sleep Research, 5(1), 12-15. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2869.1996.00013.x. [144] Lennd, M. G., Triggs, T. J., & Redman, J. R. (1998). Interactive effects of sleep deprivation, time of day, and driving experience on a driving task. Sleep, 21(1), 38-44. doi:10.1093/sleep/21.1.38. [145) VanLoon, R. J., Brouwer, R. F. T., & Martens, M. H. (2015). Drowsy drivers' under -performance in lateral control: How much is too much? Using an integrated measure of lateral control to quantify safe lateral driving. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 84, 134-143. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2015.08.012.
[146] W6rle, J., Metz, B., Steinbom, M. B., Huestegge, L., & Baumann, M. (2021). Differential effects of driver sleepiness and sleep inertia on driving behavior. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 82, 111-120. doi: 10.101 6/j.trf.2021.08.001.
[147] Philip, P., Sagaspe, P., Moore, N., Taillard, J., Charles, A., Guilleminault, C., & Bioulac, B. (2005). Fatigue, sleep restriction and driving performance. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 37(3), 473-478. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2004.07.007. [148] Pack, A. I., Maislin, G., Staley, B., Pack, F. M., Rogers, W. C., George, C. F. P., & Dinges, D. F. (2006). Impaired performance in commercial drivers: Role of sleep apnea and short sleep duration. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, 174(4), 446-454. doi:10.1164/rccm.200408-1146OC. [149] Sagaspe, P., Taillard, J., Akersted, T., Bayon, V., Espid, S., Chaumet, G., Bioulac, B., & Philip, P. (2008). Extended driving impairs nocturnal driving performances. PLoS ONE, 3(10). doi:10.1371/joumal.pone.0003493. [150] Davenne, D., Lericollais, R., Sagaspe, P., Taillard, J., Gauthier, A., Espid, S., & Philip, P. (2012). Reliability of simulator driving tool for evaluation of sleepiness, fatigue and driving performance. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 45, 677-682. doi: 10. 1016/j.aap.2011.09.046.
[151] Amedt, Wilde, Munt, & Maclean. (2000). Simulated driving performance following prolonged wakefulness and alcohol consumption: Separate and combined contributions to impairment. Journal of Sleep Research, 9(3), 233-241. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2869.2000.00216.x.
[152] Dawson, D., & Reid, K. (1997). Fatigue, alcohol and performance impairment. Nature, 388(6639), 235-235. doi:10.1038/40775.
[153] Hack, M. A., Choi, S. J., Vijayapalan, P., Davies, R. J. 0., & Stradling, J. R. (2001). Comparison of the effects of sleep deprivation, alcohol and obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) on simulated steering performance. Respiratory Medicine, 95(7), 594- 601. doi:10.1053/rmed.2001.1109.
[154] Powell, N. B., Schechtman, K. B., Riley, R. W., Li, K., Troell, R., & Guilleminault, C. (2001). The road to danger: The comparative risks of driving while sleepy. Laryngoscope, 111(5), 887-893. doi:10.1097/00005537-200105000-00024. [155] Williamson, A. M., & Feyer, A. M. (2000). Moderate sleep deprivation produces impairments in cognitive and motor performance equivalent to legally prescribed levels ofalcohol intoxication. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 57(10), 649-655. doi:10.1136/oem.57.10.649.
[156] Williamson, A. M., Feyer, A. M., Mattick, R. P., Friswell, R., & Finlay -Brown, S. (2001). Developing measures of fatigue using an alcohol comparison to validate the effects of fatigue on performance. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 33(3), 313- 326. doi:10.1016/S0001-4575(00)00045-2.
401
-542-

Civil Engineering Journal Vol. 8, No. 02, February, 2022 [157] Falleti, M. G., Maruff, P., Collie, A., Darby, D. G., & McStephen, M. (2003). Qualitative similarities in cognitive impairment associated with 24 h of sustained wakefulness and a blood alcohol concentration of 0.05%. Journal of Sleep Research, 12(4), 265-274. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2869.2003.00363.x.
[158] Lamond, N., & Dawson, D. (1999). Quantifying the performance impairment associated with fatigue. Journal of Sleep Research, 8(4), 255-262. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2869.1999.00167.x. [159) Smiley, A., Persaud, B., Bahar, G., Mollett, C., Lyon, C., Smahel, T., & Leslie Kelman, W. (2005). Traffic safety evaluation of video advertising signs. Transportation Research Record, 1937(1937), 105-112. doi:10.3141/1937-15. [160] Lee, S. E., McElheny, M. J., & Gibbons, R. (2007). Driving Performance and Digital Billboards Final Report. Virginia Tech Transportation Institute, Center for Automotive Safety Research, Virginia, United states. [ 161 ] Alm, H., & Nilsson, L. (1995). The effects of a mobile telephone task on driver behaviour in a car following situation. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 27(5), 707-715. doi:10.1016/0001-4575(95)00026-V. [162] T6mros, J. E. B., & Bolling, A. K. (2005). Mobile phone use - Effects of handheld and handsfree phones on driving performance. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 37(5), 902-909. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2005.04.007. [163] Yannis, G., Papadimitriou, E., Karekla, X., & Kontodima, E. (2010). Mobile phone use by young drivers: Effects on traffic speed and headways. Transportation Planning and Technology, 33(4), 385-394. doi: 10. 1080/03 081060.2010.49403 0. [ 1641 Backer-Grondahl, A., & Sagberg, F. (2011). Driving and telephoning: Relative accident risk when using hand-held and hands - free mobile phones. Safety Science, 49(2), 324-330. doi: 10. 10 1 6/j.ssci.2010.09.009. [165] Al-Darrab, I. A., Khan, Z. A., & Ishrat, S. I. (2009). An experimental study on the effect of mobile phone conversation on drivers' reaction time in braking response. Journal of Safety Research, 40(3), 185-189. doi:10.1016/j.jsr.2009.02.009. [166] Negulescu, M., Ruiz, J., Li, Y., & Lank, E. (2012). Tap, swipe, or move: Attentional demands for distracted smartphone input.

Proceedings of the Workshop on Advanced Visual Interfaces AVI, 173-180, New York, United States. doi: 10. 1145/2254556.2254589.
[167] Rudin-Brown, C. M., Young, K. L., Patten, C., Lenne, M. G., & Ceci, R. (2013). Driver distraction in an unusual environment:

Effects of text -messaging in tunnels. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 50, 122-129. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2012.04.002. [168] Haque, M. M., & Washington, S. (2014). A parametric duration model of the reaction times of drivers distracted by mobile phone conversations. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 62, 42-53. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2013.09.010. [169] Tivesten, E., & Dozza, M. (2014). Driving context and visual -manual phone tasks influence glance behavior in naturalistic driving. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 26(PA), 258-272. doi:10.1016/j.trf.2014.08.004. [170] Stavrinos, D., Garner, A. A., Franklin, C. A., Johnson, H. D., Welburn, S. C., Griffin, R., Underhill, A. T., & Fine, P. R. (2015).

Distracted Driving in Teens With and Without Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder. Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 30(5), e183-e191. doi: 10. 10 1 6/j.pedn.2015.04.006.
[171] Papadakaki, M., Tzamalouka, G., Gnardellis, C., Lajunen, T. J., & Chliaoutakis, J. (2016). Driving performance while using a mobile phone: A simulation study of Greek professional drivers. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 38, 164-170. doi:10.1016/j.trf.2016.02.006.
[172] Choudhary, P., & Velaga, N. R. (2017). Modelling driver distraction effects due to mobile phone use on reaction time.

Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 77, 351-365. doi: 10. 10 1 6/j.tre.2017.02.007. [173] Yan, W., Xiang, W., Wong, S. C., Yan, X., Li, Y. C., & Hao, W. (2018). Effects of hands -free cellular phone conversational cognitive tasks on driving stability based on driving simulation experiment. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 58, 264-281. doi: 10. 10 1 6/j.trf.2018.06.023. [174] Zhang, L., Cui, B., Yang, M., Guo, F., & Wang, J. (2019). Effect of using mobile phones on driver's control behavior based on naturalistic driving data. International Journal of Enviromnental Research and Public Health, 16(8). doi: 10.3390/ijerph 16081464.
[175] Kreusslein, M., Morgenstern, T., Petzoldt, T., Keinath, A., & Krems, J. F. (2020). Characterising mobile phone calls while driving on limited -access roads based on SHRP 2 naturalistic driving data. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 70, 208-222. doi: 10. 10 1 6/j.trf.2020.03.002. [176] Choudhary, P., & Velaga, N. R. (2019). Driver behaviour at the onset of yellow signal: A comparative study of distraction caused by use of a phone and a music player. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 62, 135-148. doi:10.1016/j.trf.2018.12.022.
[177] Amedt, J. T., Wilde, G. J. S., Munt, P. W., & MacLean, A. W. (2001). How do prolonged wakefulness and alcohol compare in the decrements they produce on a simulated driving task? In Accident Analysis and Prevention (Vol. 33, Issue 3, pp. 337-344). doi:10.1016/S0001-4575(00)00047-6.
402
-543-

Civil Engineering Journal
Vol. 8, No. 02, February, 2022
[ 1781 Akerstedt, T., Peters, B., Anund, A., & Kecklund, G. (2005). Impaired alertness and performance driving home from the night shift: A driving simulator study. Journal of Sleep Research, 14(1), 17-20. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2869.2004.00437.x. [179] Anderson, C., & Horne, J. A. (2006). Sleepiness enhances distraction during a monotonous task. Sleep, 29(4), 573-576. doi: 10. 1093/sleep/29.4.573.
[180] Vakulin, A., Baulk, S. D., Catcheside, P. G., Anderson, R., Van Den Heuvel, C. J., Banks, S., & McEvoy, R. D. (2007). Effects of moderate sleep deprivation and low -dose alcohol on driving simulator performance and perception in young men. Sleep, 30(10), 1327-1333. doi: 10. 1 093/sleep/30.10.1327.
[181] Jackson, M. L., Croft, R. J., Owens, K., Pierce, R. J., Kennedy, G. A., Crewther, D., & Howard, M. E. (2008). The effect of acute sleep deprivation on visual evoked potentials in professional drivers. Sleep, 31(9), 1261-1269. doi:10.5665/sleep/31.9.1261.
[182] Anund, A., Fors, C., Ihlstrom, J., & Kecklund, G. (2018). An on -road study of sleepiness in split shifts among city bus drivers.

Accident Analysis and Prevention, 114, 71-76. doi: 10. 101 6/j.aap.2017.05.005. [183] Caponecchia, C., & Williamson, A. (2018). Drowsiness and driving performance on commuter trips. Journal of Safety Research, 66, 179-186. doi: 10. 10 1 6/j.jsr.2018.07.003. 403
-544-

Civil Engineering Journal
Vol. 8, No. 02, February, 2022
Appendix I
Table Al.

Summary of studies on
the effect of Billboards on driving performance
Author and Country
Study
Participants
Considered Parameters
Key findings
Smiley et al. (2005)
Naturalistic
16 drivers (age 25-50)
Glance behavior,
Compared to static billboards, glances at video signs were related (1591, Canada
Headway
to a longer headway.

Lee et al. (2007) [ 160J,
36 drivers (18 male, 18
Glance behavior, Speed,
Longer looks in the direction of electronic billboards. higher USA
Naturalistic
female) [younger age, 18-35
Lane deviations
speed variation due to billboards. More lane deviations due to the and older age:50-751
presence of digital and static billboards,
Dukic et al. (2013) [35],
Sweden
Naturalistic
41 drivers (Age 35-55)
Gaze behavior
Electronic billboards attracted more glances than road signs. `
Belyusar et al. (2016)
Naturalistic
123 drivers (younger age:

Glance behavior
Numerous glances towards Digital billboards had a duration [7], USA
20-29 and older age:60-69)
greater than 2 sec.

Stavrinos et a1. (2016)
Simulation
66 drivers (Young: 16-19
Glance behavior
It was confirmed that billboards did not affect glance pattern [24], USA
Middle: 35-55, Older: >65)
activity.

Young et al. (2017) [13],
Naturalistic
19 drivers (12 male, 7
Situation Awareness
Static billboards had little effect on the structure or content of Australia
female) [age:22-47]
drivers' situation awareness.

Mollu et al. (2018) [17],
35 drivers (19 male, 16
Glance behavior, speed,
More eye glances in brief billboard message display times. In the Belgium
Simulation
female) [age 22-66]
reaction time
presence of a digital billboard, brake reaction time increased by

1.5 times.

Meuleners et al. (2020)
Simulation
96 drivers (Age 18-76)
Speed, lane deviation,
Complex content with short dwell time impaired driving
[8], Australia
headway, gaze fixation
performance
(Sheykhfard & Haghighi
Naturalistic
78 drivers (42 male, 36
Distraction
Drivers were more distracted during the weekend than on (2019) [321, Iran
female) [age 15-65]
weekdays.

Table A2. Summary of studies on the effect of Mobile phone use on driving performance Author and Country
Study
Participants
Considered Parameters
Key findings
Alm & Nilsson, (1995)
40 drivers, (30 male, 10
Reaction time, headway.

Older drivers took a longer reaction time than younger drivers [161], Sweden
Simulation
female)
lateral position
when they used mobile while driving.

Patten et al. (2004) [97],
40 drivers (32 male; 8
The driver's reaction time increased considerably when engaged Sweden
Naturalistic
female) [Age: 21-601
Reaction time
in a phone conversation while driving.

Tomros & Bolling (2005)
higher lane deviation while dialing and less lane deviation while Simulation
48 drivers (Age: 24-54)
Lateral position
[162], Sweden
conversing
Yannis et al. (2010) [163],
On -Road
37 drivers (26 male; 11
Speed and headway
Speed reduced, and headway increased during phone use
Greece
female) [Age:18-25]
Backer-grondahl & Sagberg
Drivers had a higher probability of crash when using a handheld (2011) [164], Norway
Survey
9314 drivers
Crash risk
phone than that of hands -free one.

Owens et al. (2011) [90],
Older drivers spent more time texting on their phones and looked On -Road
20 drivers (Age: 19-51)
Reaction time, glance
USA
inside for longer periods.

AI-darrab ct al. (2009)
The driver took a long time to apply the vehicle brake when they [165], Saudi Arabia
Naturalistic
27 drivers (Age;22-24)
Reaction time
spent more time on a phone conversation.

Negulescu et al. (2012)
On -Road
12 participants (8 male, 4
Total Eyes of Road Time
While texting, TEORT increased four times.
[166], Canada
female) [22-361
(TEORT)
Rudin-Brown et al. (2013)
Speed reduced and lane deviation increased in tunnel compared to [167], Australia
Simulation
24 drivers (Age: 25-50)
Speed, lane position
the freeway while performing texting task
Haque & Washington
The drivers reaction time was increased more than 40% when (2013)1168], Australia
Simulation
32 drivers (Age: 21-26)
Reaction time,
distracted.

Klauer et al. (2014) [114],
151 drivers (86 male, 65
While performing secondary tasks in mobile, the danger of USA
Naturalistic
female) [Age: 16-72]
Crash risk
crashing increased.

Tivcsten & Dozza (2014)
While performing visual -manual phone tasks (texting, dialing, [1691, Sweden
Naturalistic
49 drivers
Speed, glance behavior
reading), drivers had longer off -road glances.

Young ct al. (2014) [69],
24 drivers, (12 male; 12
Speed, lane deviation,
Drivers spent 29% less time looking at forwarding roadway while Australia
Simulation
female) (Age; 25-50]
eyes -off -road time
mobile texting
Yannis ct al. (2014) [1041,
34 drivers (19 male; 15
Decreased mean speed and increased mean reaction time due to Greece
Simulation
female) [Age; 18-28]
Speed, reaction time
mobile texting led to an increased crash probability.

Stavrinos et al. (2015)
Simulation
22 drivers (I I male, 1 I
Lane position
Texting while driving increased variability of lane position. [1701, USA
female) [Age: 16-18]
Thapa et al. (2015) [73],
36 drivers (30 male; 6
Considerable lateral lane deviations from texting persisted for an USA
Simulation
female)
Speed, lane deviation
average of 3.38 seconds after texting was stopped.

Papadakaki et al. (2016)
Steering position, lateral
Text -message reading and messaging had a considerable impact [171], Greece
Simulation
50 drivers
lane position
on steering position.

Choudhary & Velaga
Mobile conversation and texting increased drivers' reaction time (2017b) [172], India
Simulation
100 drivers
Reaction time
in both pedestrian and rod crossing events.

With an increase in the complexity of the mathematical
Yan et al. (2018) [173],
Simulation
30 drivers, (19 males and
Reaction time, speed, time
computation task in mobile, the driver's brake reaction time China
l l female) [Age: 22-33]
headway
increased.
404
-545-

Civil Engineering Journal
Vol. 8, No. 02, February, 2022
Jeong & Liu (2019) (94],
24 drivers (16 male, 8
Lane keeping, eye
Drivers could not keep a steady lateral lane position on severe ` Simulation
USA
female) (Age: 19-31)
movement
bend roads when distracted by a mobile phone.

Zhang et al. (2019) [174],
Drivers exhibited higher lane deviation while texting. Drivers `
Naturalistic
China
60 drivers (Age: 35-50)
Lane deviation, Speed
slowed down the vehicle while answering and dialing.

Kreusslein et al. (2020)
Longer means off -road glances due to mobile dialing and Naturalistic
[175], Germany
3500 drivers
Eye glance behavior
searching for contacts tasks.

Table A3. Summary of studies on the effect of in-built vehicle system on driving performance
Author and Country
Study Participants
Considered Parameters
Key findings
Sodhi et al. (2002)
25 drivers (16 male, 9
Longer off -road fixation durations were reported in radio tuning and rear- `
Naturalistic
[116], Spain female)
Gaze behavior
view mirror checking activities.

A higher percentage of drivers did not have their hands on the steering Stutts et al. (2005)
70 drivers (35 male, 35 Steering
wheel, eye glance,
wheel while handling in-built vehicle systems. While operating in-built Naturalistic
[125], USA female)
lateral vehicle control
vehicle systems, more eyes glance inside the car rather than on the road, and lanes change frequently.

Chisholm et al. (2008)
19 drivers (10 male, 9
Difficult iPod tasks (those requiring more than two steps) were linked to Simulation
[128], Canada
female) [age 18-221
Glance behavior
increases in the ear's duration and the number of glances.

While looking for songs, drivers spent 2.5 times longer looking away from Young et al. (2012)
Simulation
37 drivers (age-1848)
Eye fixation, Lateral
the road. An increment of 0.4s was observed in the standard deviation of [124], Australia
vehicle control, headway
time headway while engaged in the iPod tasks.

Klauer et al. (2014)
151 drivers, (86 male,65
Compared to experienced drivers, novice drivers exhibited a higher `
Naturalistic
[1141, USA female) [age 18-721
Crash risk
probability of crash while engaged in the adjustment of radio and H VAC.

Xian & Jin (2014)
Eye fixation, vehicle
Drivers spent 2.41 times longer looking away from the road when engaged Simulation
[113], China
18 drivers (20-3I)
control, completion time
in e-mail tasks.

Dingus et al. (2016)
The chance of crash increased when dealing with in-built vehicle systems Naturalistic
[1121, USA
3542 drivers (age 16-98)
Crash risk
(the radio, music player, and air conditioning).

Choudhary & Velaga,
Drivers' stop/cross
The probability of crossing an intersection was lower while performing the Simulation
(2019a) (176], India
74 drivers (age-18-53)
decisions at signalized
music player tasks than while conversing on the phone.
intersections.

Gap acceptance, accepted
The use of a music player while driving increased the gap acceptance rate Choudhary & Velaga
Simulation
81 drivers
lag, maneuver completion
while not influencing the acceptable lag or maneuver completion time, (2019b) [I I I], India
time.
implying a higher crash risk.

Table A4. Summary of studies on the effect of Sleepiness on driving performance Author and Country
Study Participants
Considered
Key findings
Parameters
Gillberg et al. (1996) [143],
Simulation 9 drivers
Speed, lane position
Night driving was slower with higher speed variability
Sweden
reaction time
Amedt et al. (2001) [1771,
18 drivers (Male,
Lane position, speed,
Driving performance dropped to the same level as that of a BAC of 0.05 Canada
Simulation
Age-19-35)
off -road occurrence
percent and 0.08 percent after 18.5 and 21 hours of awake, respectively.

Hack et al. (2001) [153],
Reaction time, off -road
Impairment degree of steering performance by 24 h without sleep and UK
Simulation 50 drivers
event
blood alcohol levels was same.

Akerstedt et al. (2005)
10 drivers (5 male, 5
Deviation of the lateral position of the vehicle increased from 18 to 43 cm [178], Sweden
Simulation
female)
Lane position
when driving home from a night shift.

Anderson & Ilorne (2006)
16 drivers (8 male, 8
Sleepiness (5h sleep restriction) enhanced distraction during a [179], Australia
Simulation female) [Age:21-25]
Reaction time
Monotonous Task.

Vakulin et al. (2007)1180],
21 drivers (age: 18-
Steering deviation,
When 4 hours of sleep deprivation was paired with a 0.035g/dL dose of Australia
Simulation
30)
breaking reaction time
alcohol, steering deviation increased considerably.

Jackson et al. (2008) [181],
19 drivers (18 male,
Reaction time, driving
Professional drivers took longer reaction time and increased errors of Australia
Simulation
1 female)
errors
emission after 27h sleep deprivation.

Abe et al.2010) [140],
In-depth crash
Ileadway, driving
The likelihood of a rear -end collision was substantially linked to a sleep Japan
1772 drivers
investigation
duration
duration of fewer than 6 hours and an increase in driving spells.

Anderson & Ilome (2013)
8 drivers, (age: 20-
A five -hour sleep the night before an afternoon drive increased long [131], Australia
Simulation
26)
Lane drift
distractions by 4 times.

Over 50 hours of sleep deprivation, drivers in both the placebo and Aidman et al. (2018) [134],
11 drivers (6male,
Simulation
Lane position, speed
caffeine groups (up to 1DS=5) reported significant fluctuation in lateral Australia
5fcmale; Age:18-28)
lane position.

Anund et al. (2018) [I82],
18 drivers, (9 male, 9
The Psychomotor Vigilance Task response time increased with split shift Sweden
Naturalistic
female)
Reaction time
working.

Caponecchia &Williamson
Lane deviation,
Performance impairments were most evident in the morning for those with Simulation 45 drivers
percent of the time
(2018) [l83], Australia
2h sleep deprivation
405
-546-

K. Domke et al., Int. J. of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics. Vol. 7, No. 4 (2012) 367-380

LARGE -SIZED DIGITAL BILLBOARDS HAZARD
K. DOMKE1, K. WANDACHOWICZr, M. ZALESINSKAI, S. MROCZKOWSKAI & P. SKRZYPCZAKZ 'Poznan University of Technology, Institute of Electrical Engineering and Electronics, Poland. '-City Road Administration Poznan, Poland.

ABSTRACT
Various kinds of media are used for outdoor advertising purposes. One such medium comprises large electronic billboards with light -emitting diodes (LED) as the source of light. Such novel advertising devices' photometric parameters are different than in the media used so far and consequently impact road traffic participants in a different manner. Digital billboards with electroluminescent diodes are large, have high luminance, and dis- play dynamically changing images. Billboards located near streets are a potential threat to traffic safety. The paper presents requirements for such billboards, the results and analysis of measurements of selected billboards located in Poznan, Poland, as well as conclusions and recommendations for large -sized billboards with LED located in the vicinity of roads and intersections.

Keywords: Digital billboards, light engineering, road safety 1 INTRODUCTION
Large -sized billboards have been in operation for a long time, dating back to 1900 in United States.

At first, these were simply large billboards covered with paper advertisements. To provide better visibility, also at night, external lighting sources projecting light onto the billboards have been used, and when the advertisement's carrier is replaced with fabric or PVC, backlight has been used. These are the most common billboards seen and operated in cities and highly populated areas. The employed lighting sources include lamps with fluorescent, halogen, metal halide, and LED light sources. The surface (up to 5 m2) of such a billboard illuminates transmitted or reflected light with relatively low illuminance (0.5-5 lx).

Similarly to many developed countries all over the world, large -sized (12-72 m2) [1] electroni- cally controlled billboards with LED diodes as the main source of light have appeared in Polish cities, towns, and other populated areas. Compared to traditionally illuminated billboards, these feature much higher brightness values (light intensity or luminance).

The dramatic increase of the number of such billboards (55 in 2009, 213 in 2010, in Poland) [1] may pose direct danger to road traffic participants, not to mention the unappealing visual disorder due to overcrowding of such advertising devices.

One of the factors increasing such risk is improperly operated, excessively bright electronic bill- boards (Fig. 3).

With the development of the technology of LED, large -sized billboards with electroluminescent diodes have come to the towns of Poland. These billboards are usually large, have high luminance, and show dynamically changing images. Car, bus, and rail vehicle drivers complain that glaring billboards located in their field of vision are uncomfortable to look at and interfere with normal driv- ing tasks, especially in the evening and at night. Billboards located near streets are a potential threat to traffic safety.

The use of a high quantity of LEDs and an electronic control system makes such devices similar to TV screens, which gives the use novel, previously unavailable functionalities, with photometric parameters unlike the previous ones. Given their large area, such billboards feature very high bright- ness — much higher than traditional billboards. In addition, the presented content may feature brightness of various levels and dynamically changing images (video, animation). At nighttime and © 2012 WIT Press, www.witpress.com
ISSN: 1755-7437 (paper format), ISSN: 1755-7445 (online), http://joumals.witpress.com DOI: 10.2495/DNE-V7-N4-367-380
-547-

368 K. Domke et al., Int. J. of Design & Nature and Ecodpnamics. Vol. 7, No. 4 (2012) Figure 1: Small billboards (cityboards) on tram stop.

Figure 2: Large -sized digital billboards on city roundabout. in poor atmospheric conditions during the day (e.g. cloudy sky, fog, rain) such billboards may uncomfortably impair the drivers' vision and hinder their ability to normally drive cars. A great majority of them are a potential source of glare and distraction among the drivers. By displaying content that resembles road traffics signs, such billboards often mislead the drivers.

Aiming to reach as many potential content viewers as possible, billboard owners install them mostly in places with intensive vehicle and pedestrian traffic, such as main traffic routes, intersec- tions, traffic circles, and close to heavily used roads and pedestrian crossings, thus putting traffic participants in danger. The lack of explicit legal regulations for operating such devices makes the situation only more evident.

The problem of negative impact of large -sized billboards on the drives has been acknowledged and partially examined, and authorities at various levels (local, state, sometimes even national) have been trying to specify permissible operating conditions for such billboards.

Legal regulations applicable in other countries are far from coherent: from complete prohibition of use across the entire country (Spain), through country -specific (Holland, South Africa, Brazil) or local partial restrictions on selected parameters in force in specific states (Queensland, Victoria, New South Wales in Australia, New York, Virginia in USA) through specific cities (San Antonio, Oakdale in USA) to no legal regulations whatsoever (numerous countries in Asia and Middle East). .•

K. Domke et a1., Int. J. of Design & Nature and Ecodynanaics. Vol. 7, No. 4 (2012) 369 Figure 3: Billboards placed too low and with high brightness.

The following are examples of requirements that apply to such billboards, accepted by local self - governments, states, and government bodies in countries that have already acknowledged the problem of outdoor billboards. Also, results of measurements of photometric and geometric param- eters of selected billboards located in Poznan, Poland, have been presented, and recommendations for the operation of large -sized billboards with LEDs have been formulated. 2 EXAMINATION OF BILLBOARDS AND THEIR IMPACT ON DRIVERS All over the world numerous and continued research projects have been completed, aiming at estab- lishing the impact of large -sized LED billboards on road traffic safety and formulating requirements and recommendations regulating the principles of installation and operation of such devices. The great majority of research projects were devoted to the topic of distracting the drivers due to the man- ner and type of the displayed advertising content [2-9]. Among others, the researchers examined the impact of animated images and video, information presented in advertisements (website addresses, text message details, phone numbers, etc.), the legibility of advertisements, the element of novelty achieved by displaying the advertisements in specific sequences, and the impact of the effect of attracting the drivers' vision by very bright surfaces in their field of vision on their distraction. Only a few projects actually focused on the billboards' photometric properties (luminance). Rather, the literature makes an attempt at adapting the results of examinations on traditional advertisements to LED billboards [10]. Also, attempts are made to adapt the results of research on light that distracts residents in relation to the evaluation of photometric properties of electronic billboards [11].

In 2010, the Poznan University of Technology conducted the first examination of the basic photo- metric properties of electronic billboards in Poland. Measurements of properties of LED billboards were taken for a selected group of advertisements located in Poznan. The most significant factors derived from the analyzed billboards impacting the drivers' vision conditions have been analyzed and isolated. A proprietary measurement procedure has been created. The description of the research, the measurement procedure, and the results are presented in [12,13]. The results permitted the eval- uation of photometric parameters of typical billboards located in Poznan and confirmed the necessity to introduce specific requirements and legal regulations that would render the installation and opera- tion of such objects impossible.

370 K. Donake et al., bat. J. of Design & Nature andEcodynanaics. Vol. 7, No. 4 (2012) 3 CURRENT LEGAL SITUATION IN POLAND
The Polish lighting standards related to the lighting of work places located outdoors [14] and road lighting [15] do not specify requirements for large -sized billboards with LEDs as objects impacting road traffic safety. The standard [14] consists of requirements on the limitation of interfering lighting and only address the reduction of inconvenience for people, animals, and plants. The stipulations of the standard fail to address requirements related to driving (drivers of vehicles present in the road).

Only maximum luminance and luminous intensity values of signs, including billboards emitting light (or illuminated ones) are specified. Unfortunately, the location of the billboard toward the observer, its angular diameter, distance from the main direction of observation, and dynamic change of luminance (brightness) related to displayed images are not taken into account.

The Polish standard's [15] requirements related to glare limitation only apply to situations where small -sized light sources (luminaires) are present in the road. The evaluation of glare is carried out on the basis of the increase of the threshold value (TI). Consequently, such requirements may not be used when evaluating glare caused by large -sized billboards with LEDs.

The currently valid ordinance of the Polish Ministry of Infrastructure [16] (point 79 applying to Art. 293 Para. (6) provides requirements for lighting devices, including billboards located outdoors or in the vicinity of buildings that may be inconvenient for pedestrians and drivers. Still, these requirements are not accurate and are no grounds to evaluate the level of inconvenience caused by billboards, especially for drivers. The ordinance specifies requirements on the illuminance of white light (5 lx) and color light (3 lx), but there is no description of the method of carrying out measure- ments in relation to both the location and external factors (impact of lighting in the road installation).

Although the ordinance talks about drivers, these requirements seem to be applicable only to those lights causing inconvenience to residents.

The Polish Outdoor Advertising Chamber, whose members are mainly owners of such billboards, has issued recommendations on digital advertisements that only comprise generic statements on the obligation to operate billboards which are `not arduous for residents in the area of their effect and not arduous to road traffic participants' and to ensure that there is a distance of at least 50 m between intersections and billboards displaying images that change more frequently than one in 5 s. [17] Unfortunately, these recommendations are not obeyed in many cases. 4 REVIEW OF REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE

TO LARGE -SIZED BILLBOARD WITH LEDS
Numerous countries carry out research on the impact of roadside billboards on reduced concentra- tion of drivers. To a large extent, the research applies to traditional advertisement media, but there are in fact several papers on electronic advertisement [18]. Generally speaking, the results of all research projects indicate that billboards distract drivers. Several countries have implemented guide- lines for issuing permits for installation of roadside billboards on the basis of results of such research projects, which were carried out mostly at the request of governmental bodies or road authorities.

In general, the current requirements and limitations applying to digital billboards fall into three groups:
• Limitations of photometric parameters and location,
• Recommendations on graphical effects,
. Recommendations on the advertisements' content.

Among the recommended limitations in the first group the one which seem most important are related to photometric parameters (brightness, luminance, and illuminance). Brightness is subjective, -550-

K. Donake et al., bat. J. of Design & Nature and Ecodynannics. Vol. 7, No. 4 (2012) 371 hence cannot be objectively measured. Electronic billboards seem less bright during the day than at night. Billboards seen at night, in city centers, seem less bright than the same billboards observed in dark, unoccupied surroundings. Electronic billboards made from electroluminescent diodes are origi- nal sources emitting light by themselves, hence luminance should be used to describe their properties.

Generally, there is no need to limit the luminance of billboards during the day, but there is no doubt such limits should be imposed for billboards at night. The so-called moth effect, described as unintentional directing of one's eyesight to the brightest objects in the field of view. Consequently, the brighter the surface of the billboard, the higher the danger it poses with regard to distracting the driver and leading their eyesight off the road [3].

The luminance of billboard surfaces may not be specified explicitly, as brightness (a subjective sensation) depends on the area of the billboard and the luminance of the surroundings. In general, all literature sources specify the billboard's luminance as the only value affecting the billboard's bright- ness. Only Outdoor Advertising Association of America (OAAA), an association of manufacturers of advertising media, specifies requirements for illuminance [19,10].

A document titled `Technical Memorandum: Evaluation of Billboard Sign Luminances' was drawn up in 2008 by the Lighting Research Center, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute at the request of the New York State Department of Transportation. The memorandum describes three stages of research: a review of recommendations for luminance calculation (on the basis of the paper by IESNA), measurements of luminance of existing billboards, and a computer simulation of an elec- tronic billboard. According to IESNA recommendations, the illuminance in the surface of an electronic billboard should be 1000 Ix for bright surroundings and 500 Ix for dark surroundings.

Assuming that the billboard surface coefficient of reflection of the light stream is 0.8, its corresponds to luminance is 250 cd/m2 and 130 cd/m2. The authors confirm that these assumptions are followed by billboard manufacturers. The authors have also measured existing billboards: six backlit bill- boards and four electronic billboards. The memorandum authors' own research lead them to a conclusion that the luminance of a backlit billboard should not exceed 280 cd/m2 at night.

A document [20] listing requirements for roadside billboards has been developed at the request of the Traffic Engineering and Road Safety section of the Queensland (Australia) Government's Department of Main Roads. The document's characteristic feature is the listing of several defini- tions. For example, roadside billboards are divided into four categories depending on their size and placement in relation to the road. Attachment D discusses the billboards' brightness and quotes a paper [21] on backlit billboards. The paper claims that `the brightness of backlit roadside billboards should be limited under any conditions'. The authors emphasize the difference between the concepts of brightness and luminance. Luminance is used for assessing the properties of a billboard as a device for displaying images. Luminance may be different in the billboard's sur- face (luminance distribution) and depending on the angle of observation. The highest luminance occurs when observing the billboard from straight ahead and is reduced as the angle of observa- tion increases. Brightness is a subjective visual sensation, whose intensity depends on the luminance of the billboard's surface (luminance distribution), the size of the billboard, the contrast (in relation to background luminance), the observer's position, and the observer's adaptation. The document presents the maximum permissible, average luminance of the billboard's surface for three areas (Table 1).

The reduction of the billboard's surface luminance is not required at night only but also in certain situations during the day. In case of a fog, bright billboard surfaces may hamper the drivers' vision.

To ensure luminance is reduced during fog, it may not be enough to equip billboards with photode- tection devices reducing their luminance at night. Other dedicated requirements for such situations may have to be implemented.
-551-

372 K. Domke et al., Int. J. of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics. Nol. 7, No. 4 (2012) Table 1: Permissible luminance values of billboards' surfaces according to [22].

Area number Description
Permissible luminance value
Area with high level of lighting, not
500 cd/m2
1 caused by road lighting system, e.g.
city centers.

Area with average level of lighting, not
350 cd/m2
2 caused by road lighting system, e.g.
suburban industrial areas, filling sta-
tions, parking lots, etc.

Area with low level of lighting, not
300 cd/m2
3 caused by road lighting system, e.g.
rural areas, residential areas.

Table 2: Minimum distances of building structures from the external edge of the roadway for various classes of roads [25].

No.

Road class Built-up area
Outside built-up area
1 National road 10 m
25 in
2 Regional road 8 in
20 in
3 District road 8 in
20 in
4 Localroad 6 in
15 in
Another important factor is the billboard's location: authors of numerous publications agree that electronic billboards distract drivers, thus becoming a potential source of danger for the safety of road traffic participants. Such billboards should not be located in the direct vicin- ity of intersections, road junctions, and in places where drivers are required to pay special attention (e.g. near pedestrian crossings). It is often suggested to only place billboards perpen- dicularly to the axis of the road [23,24]. Minimum distances between a billboard and an intersection within towns are specified to be between about 10 in up and about 50 in. In Poland, the recommended minimum distance from the billboard's side (its closest edge) to the edge of the road should be, for every road class, according to the public road law [25]. Table 2 presents minimum distances of building structures from the external edge of the roadway for various classes of roads.

The billboard's surface should be positioned to have the least negative impact on the drivers' vision process. Some authors suggest, that the billboard's surface should be situated within angles 90°= 180' in relation to the edge of the roadway (in relation to the edge of the roadway) and illumi- nation directions should be opposite to sites with elevated collision (accident) risk, for example, opposite to intersections or traffic circles. Figure 4 shows the billboard's permitted position and illumination direction [26].

In addition, a large -sized billboard should be positioned so as not to block the view of equipment critical for road traffic safety, exit from a minor road or a parking (it is sometimes observed — see Figs. 5 and 6), or a fire escape route or its designation signs [27,24]. -552-

K. Domke et al., Lit. J. of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics. Vol. 7, No. 4 (2012) 373 7Rd
� diretion of lighting
' �illboard
gnu`
a
d'vnti— fl;ghtfi,e.
dir fi-ofcar—mg
i
Figure 4: Permitted and forbidden position for billboard at the intersection [26].

Figure 5: Wrong location — billboard as the background for the traffic sign.

Figure 6: Wrong location — billboard at exit from a minor road. -553-

374 K. Domke et al., Int. J. of Design & Nature and Ecodpnamics. Vol. 7, No. 4 (2012) The second group of limitations includes the ones regulating the manner of use of the displayed image's graphical elements.

Moving images (video clips) are forbidden. The issue of displaying moving images is well cov- ered by world literature [25,6,28]. Displaying moving images (animation, video) is explicitly forbidden. Electronic billboards may only display permanent images.

Also minimum billboard display time is limited. This issue raises disputes between billboard owners and road traffic safety specialists. A billboard owners' agenda is to present as many adver- tisements in a given time unit as possible, provided the display time is long enough for the advertisements to be read and comprehended. There is no information on research projects aiming at evaluation of the impact of operation of billboards on distracting drivers. Different sources quote different times, but the data is not substantiated with empirical research. OAAA, an association of manufacturers of advertising media, quotes a time of 4 s [29]. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) operating in United States recommends a time of 8 s [28]. Recommendations implemented in 41 states in North America specify a time from 4 to 10 s [28]. The necessity to specify the mini- mum time of displaying advertisements comes as a consequence of the so-called Zeigarnik effect occurring in case of sequentially appearing advertising messages, provoking the observer to observe the remaining part of the message, leading to a much worse concentration of the driver. This is to be prevented by a requirement saying that the observer (driver) is not supposed to observe changing images in the billboard but rather is supposed to see the same still advertisement in the device [30].

The minimal time t of displaying an advert should therefore be connected with the distance d at which the advertisement is being observed and the speed limit v introduced for the road in the vicin- ity of which the billboard is located. The analyzed literature suggests the following recommendation is applied in eqn. (1):
d (1)t=v,
where t — minimum advert display time [s], d— distance from the billboard [im], v — speed limit [m/s].

Visual effects and interval between consecutive images. Generally, all available publications unanimously claim that there should be no delay between the changing images of consecutive adver- tisements. Also, no visual effects should be used between the changing images. Images must not be dimmed, brightened, overlapping, and animated [28].

Also, amount of displayed information is limited. The longer the time the driver is forced to read an advertisement, the higher the threat to traffic safety. Research has proven [6] that drivers start reading advertising texts located at a distance of 250 m if the letters of the text are 45 cm high. Reading speed is assumed at one word per second, which gives a maximum number of eight words at the speed of 90 km/h, seven words at 100 km/h, and six words at 115 km/h. The number of words should be lower in unfavorable conditions (lower letters, reduced contrast). No specific recommendations have been specified, with this regard. Still, it is known that the amount of infor- mation in the billboard should depend on the speed limit in the area and the distance to the billboard.

Sequential messages (text that appears on consecutively displayed advertising messages) are for- bidden [20].

Images whose shape or color resemble road traffic signs [20,24] or officially used emergency signals or traffic light signals [31] are forbidden. Unfortunately, such billboards are still in use (Fig. 5).
-554-

K. Domke et al., Int. J. of Design & Nature and Ecodynan ics. Vol. 7, No. 4 (2012) 375 Figure 7: Billboards with information to memorize: addresses, phone numbers.

The third group of limitations specifies the type of displayed information. Billboards should not display website addresses, phone numbers, and text message details. This kind of content requires special attention of the driver to memorize it (write it down) consequently distracting the driver (Fig. 7) [23].

It is also forbidden to display controversial content (sex, violence, religious symbols) [23].

Permits. Authorities issuing permits should be able to analyze annually the impact of electronic bill- boards on road traffic safety in a given location. Also, the billboard's properties may alter when its elements or software are changed. Ultimately, new requirements may be accepted (on the basis of newly conducted research), which may lead to the change of, for example, billboards' luminances. It is recom- mended [28] to follow the method used by Oakdale, Minnesota, authorities [32]. The billboard's investor (owner, operator) obtains a 1-year permit to operate the billboard and is required to renew it annually. 5 RESEARCH OF LARGE -SIZED BILLBOARDS WITH LEDS IN POZNAN, POLAND In the summer of 2010, over 30 large -sized billboards with LEDs have been located in the adminis- trative territory of the big polish town of Poznan. These billboards are usually large, very bright, and show dynamically changing images whose brightness varies greatly (videos, animated images), especially at night. Figure 8 shows an example of a very bright billboard with LEDs.

Billboards with LEDs are usually installed in places where the daily traffic is very high (city centers, high streets, intersections, roundabouts), and thus significantly impact the drivers' vision conditions, leading to reduced concentration and even glare. Thus, they are a potential threat to road traffic safety. Figure 9 shows an example of location of a billboard near an intersection.

Measurements of properties of large -sized billboards with LEDs have been carried out for 18 billboards located in Poznafi. The measurements have been carried out after sunset, as bill- boards impact drivers' vision the most at night. All examined billboards have been located in the drivers' fields of view, 1.5 in to 13 m above ground. All billboards were large and showed dynam- ically changing images, except for a single billboard showing still images. The surface of the largest billboard was approximately 30 m2, and approximately 5 m2 for the smallest one. Table 3 shows the highest and lowest values of the measured geometric parameters and average values for all billboards.

A site plan showing the location of the measurement point, main observation directions, and the location of the billboard in relation to the road has been drawn up during the measurements. The main directions of observation of the surface of the billboard were selected following the analysis -555-

376 K. Domke et al., Int. J. of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics. Vol. 7, No. 4 (2012) Figure 8: View of a very bright billboards at night.

Figure 9: A billboard located in a place where daily traffic is high (as seen during the day and at night) [26].

Table 3: Highest and lowest values of the measured geometric parameters and average values for examined billboards.

Billboard's geometric
Average value for
Highest of
Lowest of
parameter
all billboards
measured values
measured values
height [m]

3.1 4.8

1.2 width [m]

4.9 6.3

2.9 surface [m2]

15.2 30.1

5.4 of the location of the billboard in relation to the layout of the street and the traffic system (one-way streets, no turn or turn only signs). The location of measurement points was based on the assumed division of angles, for which the billboard's luminance was measured and possibilities of taking practical measurements were assessed. Figure 10 shows examples of site plans of two measurement points.

The measurement of photometric parameters included the measurement of the luminance of the billboard's central point, the luminance of the surface of the road as the adaptive surface for road users and the luminance of the billboard's background. The luminance of the billboard's central point was measured in plane perpendicular to the surface of the billboard's measurement point. -556-

K. Donake et al., Int. J. of Design & Nature and Ecodpwn2ics. Vol. 7, No. 4 (2012) 377 Figure 10: Street layout indicating the examined billboard and locations of measurement points for angles 0°, 20°, 40°, 60' and main directions (marked with arrows in traffic lanes) [26].

Table 4: List of measured luminance values.

Average value for Highest of Lowest of
Luminance [cd/m2] all billboards measured values measured values Maximum for billboard's central point
Billboard surroundings
Horizon
Road surface
1983
7953
377

9.3 108

0.9 1.8

6.5 0.2

3.1 4.6

1.1 The billboard's maximum and minimum luminance in this point was measured. The change of luminance in the billboard's central point depending on four different angles of observation in relation to the plane perpendicular to the surface of the billboard was measured. The road surface average luminance was measured for the lane of traffic moving toward the billboard. The bill- board's background luminance was measured for surfaces located in its closest vicinity and for the horizon in the back of the observed billboard.

Table 4 presents the summary of luminance measurements, and a selected distribution of lumi- nance in the billboard's surroundings is shown in Fig. 11. 6 ANALYSIS OF OBTAINED RESULTS
The measurements of properties of large -sized billboards with LEDs confirmed the existence of high values of luminance of billboard surfaces at low values of luminance of the vicinity of the billboards.

If a value of 500 cd/m2 suggested in [12,21] and presented in Table 1 is assumed as a criterion of evaluation of permissible values of luminance for high illuminance surfaces, then only 2 out of the examined 18 billboards meet this requirement. The two billboards had maximum luminance of 377 cd/m2 and 388 cd/m2. The remaining billboards luminance was from 554 cd/m2 to 814 cd/m2 (6 billboards) and over 1000 cd/m2 — from 1051 cd/m2 to 7953 cd/m2 (10 billboards). The average luminance of the surface of all examined billboards was 1983 cd/m2, given the average background luminance below 10 cd/m2 and average road surface luminance, namely adaptive luminance, of approximately 3 cd/m2. Almost all examined billboards featured highly variable parameters and high luminance contrasts of the displayed images. The highest value of luminance contrast, defined as the relation of the luminance of the object to the luminance of the background, was over 4000. -557-

378 K. Dornke et al., Int. J. of Design & Nature and Ecodyi7amics. Vol. 7, No. 4 (2012) 7,8
1,0 cdJrn'

0.3 v rm
32 cn,n
Figure 11: Distribution of luminance (cd/m2) in the surroundings of the billboard from Fig. 3 [26].

Figure 12: Billboards with too big luminance are illegible.

In such cases, the observed loss of the ability to read the displayed content of the advertising because of its too much brightness and too much contrast with the surroundings. Figure 12 illustrates this case.

The obtained results show it is necessary to impose limits for billboard luminance values at night. 7 CONCLUSIONS
The completed measurements and their analysis have shown the negative impact of large -sized bill- boards with LEDs on drivers' vision conditions, especially at night.

Factors resulting in negative impacts of such billboards may be divided into three categories:

Photometric parameters of billboards (high luminance at low background value, high contrast of images) can dazzle drivers.

Special character of images (dynamic changes, flashing, contents for memorization) disrupted the process of seeing the road.

Inappropriate location (near intersections, roundabouts, road vicinity, at low heights, before road traffic signs).

On the basis of research results, experience, and the analysis of recommendations discussed in other papers, the authors suggest requirements and limits related to large -sized billboards:
-558-

K. Domke et al., Int. J. of Design & Nature and Ecodynanaics. Vol. 7, No. 4 (2012) 379 • Maximum luminance of billboard surface: at night 400 cd/m-, during the day 5000 cd/m2, • Billboard location: 90°= 180' in relation to road surface border, without emission of light toward locations with higher risk of road collisions, outside intersections. • Unacceptable form of images: moving images, visual effects, interval between consecutive im- ages, information for memorize (addresses, websites, emails, phone numbers, text message in- structions).
• Minimum advertisement display time: 10 s.

REFERENCES
[1] Informacja lzby Gospodarczej Reklamy Zewnetrznej w sprawie danych o wielkosci rynku reklamy out of home wedlug stanu na dzien 31.12.2009 roku. (pol), (Information of the Outdoor Advertising Commercial Chamber on out of home advertising market size data as of December 31, 2009) Izba Gospodarcza Reklamy Zewnetrznej, http://www.igrz.com.pl/page7.html [2] Crundall D., Van Loon, E. & Underwood, G. Attraction and distraction of attention with roadside advertisements. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 38(4), pp. 671-677, 2006. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2005.12.012
[3] Green, M. Is the moth effect real? Accident Reconstruction, May/June, pp. 18-19, 2006. [4] Theeuwes J., Kramer, A.F., Hahn, S. & Irwin, D.E. "Our eyes do not always go where we want them to go: Capture of the eyes by new objects." Psychological Science, 9(5), pp. 370-385, 1998. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00071
[5] Beijer, D.D. Driver distraction due to roadside advertising. University of Toronto, Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, 2002.
[6] Dudek, C.L. Changeable Message Sign Displays During Non -Incident, Non -Roadwork Peri- ods: A Synthesis of Highway Practice. NCHRP Synthesis 383. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board, 2008.
[7] Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Transporta- tion, Federal Highway Administration, 2003. Available at: http://mutcd/fhwa.dot.gov [8] Road Safety Committee. Inquiry into Driver Distraction - Report of the Road Safety Commit- tee on the Inquiry into Driver Distraction. Parliamnentaiy Paper No. 209 Session 2003-2006.

Victoria, Australia: Parliament of Victoria, 2006.
[9] Speirs, S., Winmill, A. & Kazi, T. The Impact of Roadside Advertising on Driver Distraction:

Final Report. Basingstoke, Hampshire, England: WSP Development and Transportation, 2008. [10] Lewin, I. Digital Billboard Recommendations and Comparisons to Conventional Billboards.

Lighting Sciences Inc.
[11] IESNA, Technical Memorandum on Light Trespass: Research, Results and Recommendations.

IESNA TM-11-2000.
[12] Wandachowicz K., Zalesinska M., Domke K., Mroczkowska S., Skrzypczak P., Wielkopowier- zchniowe reklamy z diodami swiecacymi a bezpieczenstwo ruchu drogowego. (pol), (Large size LED billboards and road traffic safety), Przeglad ElektrotechniCZny, nr 4, ss. pp. 73-77, 2011. [13] Wandachowicz K., Zalesinska M., Domke K., Mroczkowska S., Skrzypczak P., Digital bill- boards and road safety. (Chapter x) Light in Engineering, Architecture and the Environment. ed. K. Domke, C.A. Brebbia, WITPress, Southampton: Boston, pp. 119-132, 2011. [14] Polish Standards, PN-EN 12464-2:2008 Swiatlo i oswietlenie. Oswietlenie miejsc pracy. Cz- esc 2: Miejsca pracy na zewnatrz, (pol.).
[15] Polish Standards, PN-EN 13201-3:2007 Oswietlenie drog, (pol.). [16] Rozporzadzenie Ministra Infrastruktury z dnia 12 marca 2009 zmieniajace rozporzadzenie w sprawie warunkow technicznych, jakim powinny odpowiadac budynki i ich usytuowanie. -559-

380 K Domke et al., Int. J. of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics. Vol. 7, No. 4 (2012) (pol.), (The Ordinance of the Minister of Infrastructure dated March 12, 2009, amending the ordinance of technical conditions to be met by buildings and their location). [17] Zasady funkcjonowania nosnikow reklamy w przestrzeni publicznej. (pol.), (Principles of operation of advertising media in public space) Izba Gospodarcza Reklamy Zewnetrznej, http://www.igrz.com.pl/pagel9.html
[18] Lee, S.E., McElheny, M.J. & Gibson, R. Driving Performance and Digital Billboards. Center for Automotive Safety Research, 2007.
[19] Digital billboards and road safety. An analysis of current policy and research findings. Outdoor Media Association Inc.
[20] TERS: Guide to the Management of Roadside Advertising, Edition 1.0. TERS Product No. 80-500. Queensland Government, Department of Main Roads, 2002. [21] Johnson, A. & Cole, B. Investigations of Distraction by Irrelevant Information. Australian Road Research, 6(3), pp. 3-23, 1976.
[22] Farbry, J., Wochinger, K., Shafer, T., Owens, N. & Nedzesky A., Research Review Of Potential Safety Effects of Electronic Billboards on Driver Attention and Distraction. Science Applica- tions International Corporation, 8301 Greensboro Drive, USA. [23] Martens M., Conceptual Guidelines for Roadside Distractions. Presentation to the Human Factors Workshop on Visual Clutter in the Road Enviromnent. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board 88th Annual Meeting, 2009.
[24] The South African National Roads Agency Limited And National Roads (SANRAL): Regula- tions on Advertising On or Visible From National Roads, 2000. [25] Ustawa z dnia 21 marca 1985 r. O drogach publicznych. Dz. U. 1985 Nr 14 poz. 60. (pol.), (Law on public roads, dated March 21, 1985. Journal of Laws 1985 No. 14, item 60). [26] Domke, K., Wandachowicz, K., Zalesinska, M., Mroczkowska, S. & Skrzypczak, P. Ocena za- grozen wystepujacych w ruchu drogowym powodowana przez wielkopowierzchniowe reklamy z diodami swiecacymi. Raport z badan. (pol.), (Evaluation of risks in road traffic caused by large size LED billboards. Examination report) Poznan University of Technology, 2010. [27] Cairney, P. & Gunatillake, T. Roadside advertising signs —A review of the literature and recom- mendations for policy. ARRB Transport Research. Contract Report for RACV (Royal Automo- bile Club of Victoria), 2000.
[28] Wachtel, J. Safety Impacts of the Emerging Digital Display Technology for Outdoor Advertis- ing Signs. Submitted Under NCHRP Project 20-7 (256), 2009. [29] Inquiry into Driver Distraction, Road Safety Committee. Parliament of Victoria, Australia, 2006.
[30] Chan, E., Pradhan, A.K., Knodler, M.A., Pollatsek, A. & Fisher, D.L. Evaluation on a driv- ing simulator of the effect of drivers' eye behaviors from distractions inside and outside the vehicle. Human Factors, 2008.
[31] Amending chapter 28 of the city code of San Antonio, Texas, by adding provisions for digital signs. An ordinance: 2007-12-06-1247, NH/TM: 10/18/2007, http://www.sanantonio.gov/dsd/ pdf/B.pdf
[32] Zillmer, K., Oakdale ready for latest billboards — City passes dynamic sign ordinance. Oakdale Lake Ehno Review, 2008.
-560-

Benjamin Matlock
From: Fermin Preciado, P.E.

Sent: Monday, May 16, 2022 2:14 PM
To: Benjamin Matlock
Subject: FW: Copy of Public Comment Letter for 5-18-22 Planning Commission Hearing Attachments: IMG_1011 jpg; IMG_1014.jpg; IMG_1021.jpg
Ben,
FYI... (email 1 of 2)
Fermin Preciado, P.E.

Director of Developulent Services/City Engineer
City of Yucaipa
City Hall • 34272 Yucaipa Blvd . Yucaipa, CA 92 399
Office: 909-797-2-1S9 EN1, 2-10
From: Pamela Smyth
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2022 10:45 AM
To: Fermin Preciado, P.E. ;
Subject: Copy of Public Comment Letter for 5-18-22 Planning Commission Hearing Dear Mr. Preciado,
I was thinking that you should have a copy of what I sent on April 27th in response to the Notice I received as my home and property sit 250' 5E of the proposed conversion of the 55' tall, 48'x14' wide V-shaped billboard at 31103-31107 Outer Hwy. 10.

I sent a copy down to the city of Redlands because my property is in the R-1 rural residential district but sits on Yucaipa boundary lines on the north, west, and east sides. That means I am immediately affected by projects planned for properties that abut mine as this billboard conversion does. Mine is the only residence in the entire Yucaipa Valley to be immediately and continuously impacted by the intrusion of this structure into the interior of my two-story, historic to Yucaipa Valley 1926 farm house. This house is featured in photos from the Yucaipa Historical Society archives from the 1930s. -561-

About a month ago, the sign company contracted to design and build the new billboard asked to come tc see the sign as I called to ask for help with the technical specifications concerning the angle, glare, and nature of the every 8 second changing images or full-sized ads and how they are broadcast into my home and immediate environment (front yard, driveway, etc.).

Mr. Ondeck asked if he could come to see it so that he could better explain how such a billboard works -- he also said he would bring his design consultant with him. They drove all the way from Long Beach and arrived here at BPM. They looked at it from my doors and windows and from my property and driveway.

They came up with ways to make it better in the interest of being a "good neighbor" --concessions that would improve the extreme visibility/viewing area of 75% of the billboard from my home at only 250 f t. away.

I think you need to see that angle. No one from the City of Yucaipa even came to look around up here to see that there is a home facing the billboard and clearly in the line of sight as that 55' tall structure overpowers the environment and the tallest of trees, even to make it an "in your face" intrusive and obstructive presence. From an engineering point of view, I think you should have been consulted, at the very least. This structure was grandfathered in and erected before Yucaipa incorporated so it simply went up without my mother's consideration given or asked for, I don't believe.

Attached also are recently taken photos that show what appears in my living room vintage, oak paned glass entry hall front door ( one of two original Redlands Community Hospital Surgery swinging doors circa 1900s), The photographer, Bruce Herwig II of Redlands, stood near my carport and looked toward the house and north-east corner of my front door porch landing from about 70' away to take the first two that show the huge reflection of the current billboard content in the front door. Then, he came into the house and stood clear back to the west -facing exterior living room wall to capture what I see every night and day from my living room and what hits me in the face when I come down the stairs at night, This is what nobody sees, Mr. Preciado.

The reflections are real and as big as the photographer captured them --no zooming in --no touch ups --it is what it is! I can read the billboard ads from my front door without glasses, even --need the phone number --just go to the front door and there it is!
To say this is not a "disturbance" is to deny its invasion of my home and privacy, even. Who would live with this? Maybe you can provide some wise counsel and insight to the Planning Commissioner who may be unaware of this unique situation and how their decision making may have those "unintended consequences" that arise from a lack of greater knowledge.

Staff has put the matter on the Consent Calendar, saying there was no controversy or public objection, essentially, The Commission will be voting "sight unseen" and I believe they need to come to my home and I have invited them to do so in both my responses and will again in my public comment Wednesday evening. I think they will be floored because nobody knows there are homes up here behind the commercial businesses.

I think it is only fair and right that they look it this condition before they make such a serious decision based solely on assumption and the perception of someone else who also has never physically come to my home and met with me to see it "up close and personal" as they say, -562-

You and I have been with this city since it incorporated --we go back to John McMains and Asher --and to the first code enforcement officer --that scrappy little gal who fought for what was right and got the big jobs done --all by herself --her name just now escapes me! Please take a few minutes to read and review my comment and the photos --clearly, the sign company men found cause to make changes in the engineering and agreed that the angle was well beyond what it needed to be to be seen from the freeway. If they have found cause to make improvements from the engineering and LED lighting control standpoints, then so should the City consider their recommendations.

Thank you for being there, still. Marie Graham --just came back to me! Remember her? You are doing double -duty now as Director of Development Services and City Engineer --the most capable employee the City has --I can attest to that!
I hope you might attend the hearing this Wednesday night --just for your own information as I feel you may have been overlooked in some way --
Yours sincerely,
Pamela L. Smyth
-563-

Benjamin Matlock
From: Fermin Preciado, P.E.

Sent: Monday, May 16, 2022 2:14 PM
To: Benjamin Matlock
Subject: FW: Forgot to Attach the Public Comment re Billboard Conversion with the Photos! Attachments: Cover Ltr for Public Comment Ltr No. 2 on Billboard RGPA.docx; PUBLIC COMMENT LETTER DUE APRIL 27, 2022.docx
FYI... (email 2 of 2)
Fermin Preciado, P.E.

Director of DeNrelopment Services/City Engineer
City of Yucaipa
City Hall . 34272 Yucaipa Blvd • Yucaipa, CA 92399
Office: 909-797 -2439 F x-t. 240
ucai11". ;
Subject: Forgot to Attach the Public Comment re Bill oar onversion with the Photos! Dear Mr. Preciado:

I just realized I forgot to add the main document as I got a phone call in the middle of finishing the letter to you!
Thank you once again for your valued time and consideration -- Pamela Smyth
-564-

0 Ta

s
ii ri V' _
�wA. m
dill
A k {

T.
rya
-Aar
moll
-k I

PLANNING COMMISSION SPEAKING NOTES 5/18/22
GOOD EVENING.

1. I REQUEST THAT THIS ITEM BE TAKEN OFF THE CONSENT CALENDAR IN

LIGHT OF WHAT MAY BE NEW INFORMATION YOU ARE RECEIVING FROM ME TONIGHT REGARDING THE DESIGN.

2. I AM A 72 YEAR RESIDENT OF YOUR COMMUNITY, A PRODUCT OF YOUR SCHOOLS, A 1963 GRADUATE OF YHS, TEACHER THERE AND AT CRAFTON HILLS COLLEGE. MY PROPERTY HAS SHARED YOUR BOUNDARY LINES WITH THE CITY OF REDLANDS SINCE THE TIME OF YOUR INCORPORATION.

3. I OPPOSE THIS BILLBOARD AS PROPOSED- BUT MODIFICATIONS

SUGGESTED BY ANDY CHAPMAN AND MIKE ONDEK, WHO CAME ALL

THE WAY TO MY HOME FROM LONG BEACH TO SEE IT FOR
THEMSELVES, WOULD GIVE EVERYONE A WIN -WIN SITUATION.

4. AS YOU CAN SEE BY THESE PHOTOS AND MY COMMENT LETTERS, THE BILLBOARD IS ANGLED SO THAT 75% OF IT IS VISIBLE INTO MY HOME AND ACROSS MY PROPERTY.

5. AS THE AERIAL PHOTO SHOWS, HALF THE VISIBILTY IS WASTED ON AT LEAST 300 FEET WHERE IT HITS THE REAR YARDS OF THE FRONTAGE ROAD PROPERTIES. TO BE MORE EFFECTIVE AND COST EFFICIENT, THIS

ANGLE CAN AND SHOULD BE REDUCED WITHOUT DECREASING THE
DESIRED VISIBILITY TO THE FREEWAY, AS MR. CHAPMAN EXPLAINED.

6. THE PHOTO SHOWS MY HOUSE SITTING DIRECTLY UNDER THE 300 FOOT MARK. THE DIAGRAM ON THE BACK SHOWS HOW MR. CHAPMAN

CAN REDUCE THAT REAR ANGLE AND MAKE ADUSTMENT TO THE FRONT TO HELP MITIGATE THE SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS.

7. THESE ADJUSTMENTS WOULD ALSO HELP REDUCE THE EXCESSIVE

GLARE AND BRIGHT LIGHTS THAT WILL MOST CERTAINLY CONTINUE TO BROADCAST INTO MY HOME.

8. CEQA ASKS : "DOES THE PROJECT HAVE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS

THAT WILL CAUSE SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS, EITHER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY TO ABUTTING PROPERTY?" THE ANSWER IS YES.

9. UNDER LEGISLATIVE PRINCIPLES AND POLICIES, CEQA ENCOURAGES

YOU TO CONSIDER ADDITIONAL FEASIBLE MITIGATIVE MEASURES OR ALTERNATIVES TO LESSEN ADVERSE EFFECTS IN CASES SUCH AS THESE.

10. LEONARD AND COMPANY CAN DO THAT. THEY CAN BRING ABOUT THE

BEST POSSIBLE SOLUTION IF YOU WILL MAKE THE EFFORT TO WORK WITH THEM. THEY MADE THIS EFFORT TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR. I NEED YOU TO DO THE SAME.

11. PLEASE TAKE THE TIME NEEDED TO SEE THE BILLBOARD UP CLOSE

FROM MY HOME AND PROPERTY SO THAT YOU WILL SEE THE REALITY BEHIND WHAT YOU HAVE THUS FAR ONLY SEEN ON PAPER.

1. THIS IS A FAIR AND REASONABLE REQUEST.

13. NO ONE SHOULD BE FORCED TO LIVE WITH A BILLBOARD GLARING AND INTRUDING INTO THEIR HOME. I WOULD NOT PUT A BILLBOARD AT THIS DEATHTRAP LOCATION. THE ONE NEARBY WILL MEET YOUR
ADVERTISING NEEDS. BUT IF YOU MUST, THEN MAKE IT BETTER. MAKE IT

SAFER FOR THE UNSUSPECTING BIG RIG DRIVERS AND THOSE
FOLLOWING TOO CLOSE AND TOO FAST BEHIND. MAY GOOD SENSE AND CONSCIENCE BE YOUR GUIDE.

THANK YOU.

watchfire<---,-
M
Conclusion
Given the above comparisons and measurements, the areawill see an almost undetectable difference in ambient light after installation of the digital led billboards. 5 i watchfiresigns.com 800-637-2645
-570-

f
cl
-571-

0 N s
r
r
a 4
t I
W t _
O '...
•b off,
'`.
`` M1`` _'
• ,
r 4
/II
, - 1 r!
r _ .. f... .i�� -
1 !!
to
I-'•
e
_
Z
eM1 }6a
e• F$ E.�sr�RaFa�d`
e
—572—

watchfire-4
r -
_ `
_ h•3
rimer-:=�' _�ld.Mc•.-fq .Y - � .. -_ y.. �v.K--+� -+ s-VYv.. _... -.Ms^ �1--.___ �r.w+. .+.. ij� 1,
Conciusior.

Given the above comparisons and measurements, the area will see an almost undetectable difference in ambient light after installation of the digital led billboards. 5 i watchfiresigns.com 800-637-2645
-573-

-574-

1�
2<
! % as
!off
I
o
ul
-575-

Photographer's Statement:

I took the two exterior photos on 5-14-2022 at 8:30 PM. These are single shots, no photoshopping. This is how the billboard actually appears as reflected in the front door window and reflected in the living room window looking from the southwest to the northwest at a distance of about 50 to 70 feet (in the circle driveway).

The third shot (interior shot) was taken at 8:45 PM from the living room, looking through the window on the front door.

Bruce Herwig II (909) 742-9206
Bruceherwig.wordpress.com
-576-

Opinion
caw aairtoraet■ VuaipVCilimesa News Mirror Apri129,2a22■Page9 Taxpayers waste of
money
I can't believe the city will
spend an extra S20,000 to paint
the planned uptown street
stripes, red, white, and blue.

S20,000! So much good could be
done with that money. Really
Bobby Duncan? That's a ridicu-
lous waste of money.
lUrn Juarez
Yucaipa
Street striping costs
It's going to cost S20,000 to
paint red, white and blue
stripes on a road. And this is
supposed to show patriotism?
When t was gtutving up, red,
white and blue were almost
sacred colors representing our
nation, the United States of
America These colors were on
our national flag, buntings and
nbbans that were hung with
respect and to celebrate and
honor our country and veter-
ans. Those colors were never to
he stepped on. As a color guard
in Boy Scouts, I learned that the
flag, our nations colors, was
treated with respect and never
allowed to touch the ground. it
teas approved by our city coun-
cil to have red, white and blue
stripes going up each side of
the boulevard. It's going to cost
Letters to the Editor
S20,000 to, according to the
audio recording of the city
council meeting, `show Teme-
cula that we are `redder' than
they are." According to
Councilmember Bobby Duncan,
we're going to spend $20,0W to
"boost the morale" of the 05:e
of this towel who are '-true
patriots" and "love the constitu-
tion." It's going to cost 520,E
to lay dawn a product that's
going to wear out and look like
crap in a year or so. Ok, I have
two questions. Why- wasn t Mr.

Avilds augg-tion of more
bunting, flags or colors added
to our veteran's memorials
taken into consideration.

The second question is who
came up with the 8.S x patriot
number? Did Councilmember
Duncan check the voter regis-
trations? Did he take a poll ask-
ing everyone, 'Do you love
America and believe in the Bill
or Rights and the Constitution?'
According to Mr. Duncan there
am 8,0114 people who are not
true patrints living in Yucaipa.

Wow that's good to know. It
could make me wonder about
my neighbor....hey, now that
you said that, maybe they won-
der about me!? Let's look at the
definition of a patriot from
Merriam - Webster's dictionary,
"one who loves and supports his
or her country." Nothing about
nags or painting roads. Proudly
hanging our colors whether
they be bunting or our nation's
flag is beautiful and it is patri-
atic. Putting red, white and blue
- our nations colors - on street
surfares where I can walk on it
-.. maybe not so much. Giving
same of that 20 grand to the
veterans organizations here in
Yucaipa, flying more flags and
—Tors at our memorials, stand-
ing and taking our bats off
when our nation's flag in the
color guard passes. That would
be patriotic -
Woody Andrews
Yucaipa
Opposes bittboards
Yucaipa is exceptional. We
are unique among the splash or
Inland Empire cities.

The digital billboards on the
1-10 streaming through the flat-
lands of Fontana, Rialto and
Bloomington are bordered on
the south by miles of train
yards. The north view is blight-
ed and unsightly. Yucaipa's
landscape is scenic. There are
trees and native plants and
rolling hills to be seen that are
verdant during the winter and
spring. Yucaipa's landscape is
admired for its beauty. The
giant digital billboards will
block the view of Yucaipa's
marvelous landscape.

Yucaipa is exceptional. We
take pride in our city as a
respite from the hubbub and
the look or city life. People
want to move here because
were unlike other cities that
have succumbed to the unsight-
ly blight or warehouses and
billboards.

Giant led-Iit digital bill-
boards emit piercing glaring
light that is driver -distracting.

The billboards will generate
light pollution that will be
unseemly and out of place in
the rural atmosphere of the
area, and their huge physical
appearance will be a perma-
nent disfigurement of the rural
landscape. Lamar Advertising
is a LDuisianua based company
that has offices throughout the
country. Their ubiquitous digi-
tal billboards make them a lot
of money, thousands of dollars
a month per board. The compa-
ny doesn4 cam about estbetics
or billboard blight. They are
interested only in snaking as
much money as they can for
their shareholders.

Yucaipa is exceptional and
will remain so with the viae-
yards and olive groves to come,
that are in a sense, a pledge to
keeping the feel and look of a
rural town -
I urge the city council to Its,
ten to the will of the people and
vote no an the billboard compa-
ny's plat to permanently alter
the look and feel of our excep-
tional town.

David Duron
Yucaipa
Letters to the
Editor policy
The YucairndCalimes r
News Mirror welcomes
expressions of opinion front
readers. Not all letters trill
be printed.

All letters must include
first and last name, phone
number and address.

Letters are subject to
editing, per space restric-
tions. Word count limit is
400 words.

Letter submissions are
limited to one letter per
month. Please email letters
to editorianewsmirrosnet
Calf 1-909-797-9101 for
more information.

Local Yucaipa High School students sign letters of intent Savannah Ganter, cross country, Embry Riddle University; Tiffany Terry, cross country, Embry Riddle University, Tun Monaghan, football, Whittier College, Thalia Avalos, soc. cer, Uni-Tsity of Redlands; Elizabeth Betten, track, Vanguard University; Nathaniel Martivdale, wrestling, Grandview University; and Joey Estrada, wrestling, Milwaukee School of Engineering.

Photo ctxatery of YttS
Calling all local gardeners: Music a-nd Arts Festival flower show is back Gardeners of all ages are
invited to enter their home-
grown flowers, plants and
arrangements in the Yucaipa
Music and Arts Festival Flower
Show, May 6 and 7. As part of
the Music and Arts Festival, it
is an indoor event located on
the first floor of the Yucaipa
Performing Arts Center, 12062
California St-, in Yucaipa, in the
theater room.

There is no cost to enter,
although donations are encour-
aged to help cover casts. Potted
plants must have been in the
exhibitor's possession for a
minimum of 90 days to be sub-
mitted.

Garden bouquets must be
grown by the exhibitor.

Children's arrangements must
be their own creation. There's
even a place for fruits and veg-
etables, humorous entries,
weeds, and of course. Yucaipa s
flower, the iris.

Entries for the flower show
will be accepted on Friday, May
6 from S p.m. to 6 p.m. and on
Saturday morning, May 7, from
9 to It a.m. Park an Acacia
Street, where there are two
reserved spaces and enter
through the back door. Look for
signage. No late entries will be
accepted, and no artificial flow-
ers are to be used in any of the
exhibits.

Each exhibitor is limited to
three total entries far judging.

The Divisions and Sections will
be published in the News
Efrrrur's Festival edition maga-
7mm If you have grown it in
your yard, on your patio or in
your home,
then basically
theca is a cate-
gory that it will
fit in! You are
encouraged to
bring your own
address labels
to make regis-
tering your
oirn entry easi-
er. Two are
required per
entry, so bring
six.

An "Exhi-
bition Only"
Division is
included for people who would
like to enter but do not want to
be included in the judging. This
would be appropriate for peo-
ple who would just like to dis-
Flog+!er �Izot�f
There are plenty of flowers to
admire at the Music and Arts
Festival Flower Shovr-
Rtoto by Aeetracreadw
play their
nowers or
for people
who have
more than
t h r e e
things
they would
like to
show or
for others
affiliated
with the
festival.

The fes-
tival flow-
er show
will open
at the close of judging on
Saturday, May 7, at Doan until S
pm No entry may be removed
from the show before 5 p.m. on
Saturday.

Participants must pick up
their entries between 5 p.m.
and 5:30 p.m. on Saturday.

These entries not claimed by
520 p.m. on Saturday will be
disposed of.

This year, while I'm looking
forward to all the entries, I
would most like to see people
try making mom arrangements
and bouquets," said Deborah
Henderson, owner of Ladybug
Plants Interior Plant Service
and Festival Flower Show
chairperson. "We are super
excited about our Lust floor
theater location in the
Performing Arts Center. With
the blooms this year, we know
your gardens are full of flowers
so please make this the year
you enter and get that blue rib -
ban."
-577-

David Matuszak
Thu, 14 Apr 2022 10:03:31 -0700
Dear Editor:

Here is an open letter I sent to the Yucaipa City Council. I urge your readers to comment before April 27th and voice their opposition to yet another blow to Yucaipa's rural atmosphere. First digital billboards on Outer Highway 10, next digital billboards up Yucaipa Blvd. through the heart of the city.

Yucaipa City Council:

The Friends of Live Oak Canyon are opposed to the construction of digital billboards along I- 10 (Outer Highway 10) bordering Live Oak Canyon. Consider the following:

First and foremost is the light pollution created by these signs near an area designated by Yucaipa as a Wildlife Corridor.

Second, it the urban blight created by these signs that further threaten Yucaipa's rural scenery.

Third, consider the effect of digital signs on our members who live along Outer Highway 10.

Consider their quality of life and ask yourself, would I want a digital billboard in front of my home? How would my own neighbors react to my decision to place a digital sign in front of their homes?
Lastly, in the early years of my 38-year teaching career at Yucaipa High School, I witnessed the self-serving decision making of several of the city's pioneer council members that forever changed the quaint rural scenery of Yucaipa. Live Oak Canyon is just about all we have left of that pristine rural landscape. Don't make the mistakes of your predecessors. Leave Live Oak Canyon be. Protect it as if it's all we have left, because other than Wildwood State Park, it is.

Do the right thing. Keep digital billboards out of Yucaipa and preserve -our small town atmosphere.

David Mat uszak, president
Friends of Live Oak Canyon
https•//�N,ivw facebook cotn/groups/203152950549301
_ Lt e Gak
-578-

O
CRASHED .:,

ON ' SATURDAY MORNING

THROUGH THE CALTRANS FENCE, FLIPPED OVER,

AND CAME TO REST ON ITS SIDE ON THE PAVEMENT
em
JUST 100 "-T. VIE 0 F THE ILL OARD
10-1611ANEW210r

ONE WENT HOME AND THE OTHER WAS TAKEN TO

THE HOSPITAL
-579-

THE MORNPNIG -5,.r-TEFZ ACCIDEN T, SCEr',,lE7 9-11-21 LOOKED L"IllflE THIC,

AS THE BIG RIGS COME CHUGGING UP THE GRADE, THE LANE CURVES TOWARD THE SOUTHEAST.

WHAT IS THE FIRST THING THEY SEE AND THAT GETS THEIR ATTENTION AT THE TOP OF THAT STEEP GRADE?
BUT WHY SHOULD YOU CARE?
55 ACCIDENTS HAPPENED IN THESE EASTBOUND LANES FROM THIS POINT TO THE YUCAIPA BLVD. ON -RAMP AND OVERPASS BRIDGE
OVER 9 MONTHS IN 2021

1. THE GIRLS WERE COLLEGE AGE AND DRESSED FOR A NIGHT OUT ON THE TOWN.

2. ONE CRAWLED OUT AND WANDERED AROUND IN A DAZE, TRYING TO CALL SOMEONE ON HER CELL PHONE.

3. THEN, SHE CRAWLED BACK INTO THE WRECK AND BROKEN GLASS TO HELP HER FRIEND CLIMB OUT...

WAS SPEED A FACTOR? k"vTHY DID SHE GO OFF THE ROI-,-.D? DID S i4lri FA!-!- A

1.S!_EEP AT THE lAJHlEEl_? WAS SHE BLINDED BY THE GLARE OF BTLLROARD AND UNSHIELDED PARKING LOT LIGHTS?
sm

{
T Y
D0,NfT T"�KE YOUR EYES OFF THE ROAD
DISTRACTED DRIVING IS REAL!
ACCIDENT STATISTICS FROM SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY CHP REPORTS 179

ACCIDENTS HAPPENED FROM FORD STREET TO THE YUCAIPA OVERPASS BRIDGE FROM AUGUST 28, 2021 TO NOVEMBER 04, 2021. OF THOSE ACCIDENTS, 55 HAPPENED IN THE TRUCK -CLIMBING LANES BETWEEN THE TOP OF THE GRADE AND THE BLVD. ON -RAMP.

THE TYPES: REAR -END COLLISSIONS, SIDE -SWIPES, AND STOPPED AND

SLOWING VEHICLES IN THE ROADWAY WITH BIG RIGS AND PASSENGER VEHICLES MOSTLY INVOLVED.
-581-

i1h, a ut•�+S��r�J �i}u tlU�ti V � Suer fit' U�L�11 t,�i('LS�iNJ ��.a`�il �J UiS�S,b�

HERE IS THE V-SHAPED ANGLE WITH THE SOUTHEAST THAT FACES DIRECTLY INTO THE RESIDENCE UP -SLOPE AND ELEVATED ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE TALL TREES. • AT 55' TALL, THE BILLBOARD IS VISIBLE ABOVE AND THROUGH THOSE TREES DRAW A LINE ON THAT ANGLE TOWARD THE TREES AND YOU WILL SEE THAT 75% OF THAT SIGN GOES RIGHT TO THE FRONT OF THE 3' X 3' VINTAGE OAK AND PANED GLASS

ENTRY HALL DOOR THAT FACES WEST
• THE BILLBOARD HITS ALSO HITS THE LIVING ROOM PICTURE WINDOW THAT

FACES WEST -BUT NOBODY SEES THAT FROM THE STREET LEVEL
• YOU CAN STAND OUTSIDE IN THE YARD AND SEE THE BILLBOARD CLEARLY

REFLECTED IN THE FRONT DOOR GLASS WINDOW PANES AND IN THE LIVING ROOM 8 X 4 PICTURE WINDOW FROM 250' AWAY
THIS UNIT' UE HISTORIC 1926 ERA RENOVATED FARM HOUSE IS DIRECTLY AND ACCUTELY AFFECTED BECAUSE OF THAT �.NG►.E
• THE FRONT DOOR LANDING IS TO THE LEFT. THE LIVING ROOM WINDOW TO THE

RIGHT AND BELOW IS THE VINTAGE OAK & PANED GLASS ENTRY HALL DOOR THAT RECEIVES THE WORST OF THE INTRUSION. YOU CAN SEE THE BILLBOARD THROUGH THOSE PANES.
-582-

• DUE TO THE SOUTEAST ANGLE, THE BILLBOARD FILLS MORE THAN HALF OF THE

WINDOWS AND BROADCASTS ITS SIGN INTO THE LIVING ROOM AND ALL THE WAY TO THE REAR INTERIOR WALL LIKE A GIANT BIG -SCREEN TV ... (TAKEN FROM THE RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAY IN AUGUST AND DECEMBER, 2021)

HERE IS WHAT THAT GLARE AND THE PARKING LOT FLOODLIGHTS NEXT TO THE BILLBOARD DO TO THE RESIDENCE DIRECTLY IN ITS VISUAL PATH. HERE IS MY "ROOM WITH A VIEW" THAT WAS A PLEASANT ONE "ONCE UPON A TIME"...
• THE GLARE IS SO BRIGHT THAT A DIGITAL CAMERA CANNOT CAPTURE THE IMAGE BROADCAST INTO MY FRONT DOOR WINDOW FROM A DISTANCE OF 250 FT. AWAY WITHOUT THIS KIND OF DISTORTION:
-583-

THIS GLARE IS SO BRIGHT THAT FROM INSIDE THE HOME, IT BLINDS AND SHOCKS THE EYES! HERE IS THE VIEW AS OF 5/12/22 AFTER THE TREE THAT HID PART OF THE BILLBOARD FROM VIEW, SO NOW WE SEE THE REAR OF THE 31115 CAR LOT BUILDING EXPOSED AND A VERY

CLEAR VIEW OF THE BILLBOARD

NOW WE SEE IT BY DAY AND THEN BY NIGHT

FROM THE LOWER FRONT YARD AND FROM THE FRONT DOOR OF THE HOME FROM 200 FT. AWAY DURING DAY

NOBODY SHOULD BE EXPECTED TO LIVE WITH A CONDITION THAT CONSTITUTES AN • UNDESIRABLY NOTICEABLE INTERFERENCE WITH THE RIGHT TO REASONABLE

ENJOYMENT OF ONE'S HOME AND PROPERTY
• LOWERS PROPERTY VALUE BY $30,000
• CREATES AN OBTRUSIVE AND LEGAL NUISIANCE

THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE BY ANY REASONABLE STANDARDS
IT ISN'T RIGHT. IT ISN'T GOOD. IT ISN'T JUST. IT ISN'T FAIR.

PLEASE DELAY THE DECISION TO APPROVE THIS BILLBOARD IN THIS

PARTICULAR LOCATION WITHOUT THE SIGN COMPANY'S SUGGESTED IMPROVEMENTS. THIS IS THE ONLY ONE THAT DETRACTS FROM THE

BEAUTY AND PEACE OF A RESIDENCE AND DIMINISHES THE

HOMEOWNER'S

QUALITY OF LIFE
O T HE H'r THTN Y roNtSIDER MAKING TT BETTED!
- E A GOOD NEIGHBOR -
THE SIMPLE SOLUTION?

: eA ..
i
Sal
�ji i .� • t

WHO PAYS THE PRICE? WHO RUNS THE
RISK? WHO IS MOST DISTRACTED?
WHO SUFFERS?
YOU CHOOSE.
3 E
y
y
31 3
x,�
_pC
�
-586-

_ \\\-'FN,-F0R-CIEMMNTj
N 11 OTI 1 i - : R VEIEFICLES
D'PAD11 "
NOT T.khF YOLAZ FYFS

OFF THE ROAD

From:

Brian Foote
To:

Beniamin Matlock
Cc:

Fermin Preciado
Subject:

Notice for Planning Case No. 19-155/GPA/DCA/CUP/DA
Date:

Wednesday, February 12, 2020 12:16:59 PM
Attachments:
imaQe003.i)nQ
Caltrans report - dioital display safety 2012.0
Benjamin,
I received the notice for a GPA and DCA for off -site advertising EMCs to be allowed in Yucaipa. The location noted is approximately 125 feet from the nearest property in the City of Redlands (to the south). There were no sign plans or project plans provided with the notice (please send sign plans to me when they become available). Presumably any future EMCs would be mounted on a pole or pedestal for increased height and visibility, and obviously intended to get the attention of passing motorists on Interstate 10. The neighborhood to the south is primarily residential in character (within the City of Redlands).

The comments I am submitting are from the perspective of avoiding or preventing light/glare nuisance issues being directed at the single-family residences on hillsides to the south in the City of Redlands.

I have briefly reviewed the Yucaipa Municipal Code, and I did not find any clear limitations on the brightness or intensity of lighting associated with freeway -oriented signs or pole/pedestal signs. The following sections seem to be general guidelines, which may not be applicable to freeway -oriented signs purposely designed to attract the attention of motorists:
• Section 87.0705(c) for General Provisions — "Except for time and temperature components and electronic message signs, signs may only be lit by steady, stationary, shielded light directed only at the sign, by light inside the sign, and by direct neon lighting.

The glare from such luminous source shall not exceed one half (0.5) footcandle." Any freeway -oriented signs are sure to exceed this criteria of 0.5 foot-candle in order to be visible from several hundred feet or'/ -mile away.

Section 87.0710(i) for Prohibited Signs — "Signs which are not effectively shielded so as to prevent beams or rays of light being directed at any portion of the traveled way or which are of such intensity or brilliance as to cause glare or to impair the vision of the driver of any motor vehicle, or which otherwise interfere with any driver of a motor vehicle." There is no objective standard referenced here as to what constitutes or defines excessive intensity or brilliance.

You may want to consider a couple of things for your code amendment, for each Sign CUP that gets submitted:
1) Require a digital display intensity study for each proposed freeway -oriented sign (to prevent excessive and unnecessary brightness that might interfere with motorists' night vision, and/or result in a nuisance to nearby residential properties). Also establish a maximum brightness level in the code so you have an objective standard to refer to.
2) Require a line -of -sight analysis (including flag test) to determine the necessary height of pole/pedestal signs relative to the varying freeway elevation & sight sm

distances.
3) You should require dimming the display screen brightness during hours of darkness. 4) You could require minimum display intervals (see attached Caltrans report on the effects of outdoor advertising displays on driver safety). 5) Prohibit flashing and scrolling text or colors, video streaming, and other screen features that result in nuisance effects or reduce driver safety.

Again, my main concern is avoiding or preventing light/glare nuisance effects being directed at the single-family residences on hillsides to the south in the City of Redlands (where the ground is approximately 80-100 feet higher than Parcel #0300-131-19, and they could potentially have a clear line -of -sight directly at an elevated EMC mounted on a pole or pylons). If these EMCs are placed and designed to be clearly visible for motorists at 1,000 or more feet away, then they could potentially have some unintended light/glare intrusion consequences for nearby single-family homes that are only a few hundred feet away.

Please send all future notices and staff reports related to this matter to my attention.

Thank you and have a great day,
Brian Foote, AICP
Planning Manager/City Planner
City of Redlands
Development Services Dept., Planning Division

Benjamin Matlock
From: David Matuszak
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2022 9:56 AM
To: Benjamin Matlock
Subject: Public comment re: digital billboards
Yucaipa City Council:

The Friends of Live Oak Canyon are opposed to the construction of digital billboards along 1-10 (Outer Highway 10) bordering Live Oak Canyon. Consider the following:

First and foremost is the light pollution created by these signs near an area designated by Yucaipa as a Wildlife Corridor.

Second, it the urban blight created by these signs that further threaten Yucaipa's rural scenery.

Third, consider the effect of digital signs on our members who live along Outer Highway 10. Consider their quality of life and ask yourself, would I want a digital billboard in front of my home? How would my own neighbors react to my decision to place a digital sign in front of their homes? Lastly, in the early years of my 38-year teaching career at Yucaipa High School, I witnessed the self-serving decision making of several of the city's pioneer council members that forever changed the quaint rural scenery of Yucaipa. Live Oak Canyon is just about all we have left of that pristine rural landscape. Don't make the mistakes of your predecessors.

Leave Live Oak Canyon be. Protect it as if it's all we have left, because other than Wildwood State Park, it is.

Do the right thing. Keep digital billboards out of Yucaipa and preserve our small town atmosphere.

David Matuszak, president
i
iends of Live Oak Can on
https://ww� v.facebook.comlgroups/203152950549301
Friends of
Y� Live Oak
-0;
Canyon
-590-

Pamela L. Sm th
April 26, 2022
Mr. Benjamin Matlock
City of Yucaipa
Development Services Department
34272 Yucaipa Boulevard
Yucaipa, CA 92399
Re: Public Comment/ Case Nos. 21-096, 21-104, and 21-154/GPA/DCA/DA/CUP — Ordinance No. 393 Dear Ben,
Attached is my public comment letter in regard to the proposed billboard conversion, particularly, located at 31107 Outer Hwy. 10, Yucaipa. I am also attaching a copy of the first public comment letter from September of 2021 as a point of reference should anyone who did not see it then and may need to revisit that letter in conjunction with this one.

Thank you once again for the always gracious and professional consideration you have given to me with regard to this project.

Best regards,
Pamela
Attachments: Public Comment Letter dated April 26, 2022 Public Comment Letter of 2021
-591-

Benjamin Matlock
From: Pamela Smyth
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 8:09 PM
To: Benjamin Matlock
Subject: Old or First Public Comment Ltr from 2021 for Attachment to Second Ltr. Due 4-27-22 Attachments: FINAL REVISION OF COMMENTS FOR PLANNING COMMISSION RE BILLBOARDS.docx I am sending this separately from the Public Comment letter due Wednesday, April 27th as both are on the large size. I explain this in my cover letter for the current public comment letter due tomorrow. I will be sending that one later on this evening so it will come after this one.

Thank you for putting the two together in case someone didn't get to read the first one and might need a frame of reference for the second one.

Yours sincerely,
Pamela 5myth
-592-

Benjamin Matlock
From: Pamela Smyth
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 9:47 PM
To: Benjamin Matlock;
Subject: FINAL FOR PROOFING OF PUBLIC COMMENT DUE APRIL 27TH.docx Attachments: Cover Ltr for Public Comment Ltr No. 2 on Billboard RGPA.docx; PUBLIC COMMENT LETTER DUE APRIL 27, 2022.docx
I have a separate cover letter attached here to go with this second and current public comment letter that also explains why I am attaching the copy of the old, first public comment letter, as well, in case someone may wish to review it as a frame of reference.

Thank you for your assistance getting these documents printed out, copied, and circulated to the Planning Commission and subsequent City Council review.

Yours sincerely,
Pamela Smyth
-593-

Benjamin Matlock
From: Pamela Smyth
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2022 9:59 PM
To: Benjamin Matlock; [email protected]
Subject: Public Comment Letter Due April 27th Title in E-mail to You! Well, when you see that I saved the big document as Final for Proof ing... you can tell how tired I was when I was getting ready to send it! What I sent is the final revision after I created one for proofreading! Please disregard the word proofing! I made multiple drafts and revisions of this work, as well you can appreciate and imagine. There always seems to be something I overlook --at least it isn't on the front page of the comment, I hope!
Sorry about that!
One tired editor--
PL.S
-594-

From: Pamela Smyth
To: Berriamin Matlock
Subject: Final Revision of ornmen or ann ng ommission Proposal Re EMCs and Amendments.doc< Date: Monday, September 6, 20219:03:56 PM
Attachments: Final Revision of Comments for Plannina Commission Proposal Re EMCS and Amendments.docx Photos to Accompany Comments on Proposal to Convert Static Billboard to EMC at 31103 Outer HWv.do LTR TO I MCMAINS TO ACCOMPANY FLOODLIGHT POWERPOINT SLIDES.do Ltr. to Ben Matlock Re Comment.do
Dear Mr. Matlock:

I am experiencing technical difficulties with my printer and color printing, particularly. I am sending you a copy of my comment letter re Case No. PL20210000104 and Proposal Case No. 21-
1041GPAI[)CAICUPI[)A as a back up in the event I am not able to print the letter, accompany documents, and signed Project Notice I plan to hand -deliver to City Hall on Tuesday. Unfortunately, I do not have a Fax machine and do not have access to one.

Covid and the holiday weekend has presented many of us with out -of - the ordinary challenges.

Thank you again for your assistance.

Pamela L. Smyth
-595-

City of Yucaipa Planning Division
34272 Yucaipa Blvd
Yucaipa, CA 92399
Attn: Mr. Benjamin Matlock, Project Planner
Re: Case No. PL20210000104
Applicant: Leonard and Company
Proposal Case No. 21-104/GPA/DCA/CUP/DA
Dear Mr. Matlock:

Attached please find my comment letter in response to the Project Notice dated August 24, 2021, a copy of the letter sent to John Mc Mains, a document providing photos to accompany the comment letter, and a self- addressed stamped envelope.

Thank you for your assistance with the preparation of this comment. I plan to drive the needed documents to City Hall by the close of business on Tuesday, September 7th; however, I will send the accompanying photo document to you via e-mail as my printer is not printing in color as needed.

Please attach the photo document to the comment letter, if you would be so kind. If I cannot enter the building to take this to the counter due to Covid restrictions, I will deposit these documents in the outside drop box and hope it is still there for that purpose. As I explained, I am allergic to the vaccines and have been advised to keep distanced from the public as much as possible due to my age, mainly.

Below is a list of those individuals and agencies, apart from City of Yucaipa personnel, to receive copies of these documents via e-mail due to the time constraints.

I would ask that you kindly provide copies for the City of Yucaipa recipients here via Tammy Vaughan, City Clerk, if that is not too much trouble.

Oa"ea. myt
-596-

Please distribute copies of the comment letter, letter to John Mc Mains, and accompany photos page to the following City of Yucaipa recipients, only:

For City of Yucaipa:
c/o Tammy Vaughan, City Clerk:

Fermin Preciado, City of Yucaipa Director of Development Services Grant Malinoski, Chief, Yucaipa Fire Dept.

David Snow,City Attorney
For City of Redlands:
c/o Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk:

Brian Desatnik, Director, Development Services
John R. Harris, Director, Municipal Utilities and Engineering Dept.

Jim Topoleski, Chief, Redlands Fire Dept.

Dan Mc Hugh, City Attorney
Troy Tusup, Acting Chief ODA, Caltrans
Nathan O'Neill, Policy and Program Director, Scenic America Patrick Frank, President, Los Angeles Chapter, Scenic America Penny Smyth Fedorchak
-597-

Re: Case No. PL20210000104
Applicant: Leonard and Company
Proposal: Case No. 21-104/GPA/DCA/CUP/DA
Location: 31103 Outer Hwy. 10, APN: 030010119
To: City of Yucaipa Planning Division
The City of Yucaipa Development Services webpage states: "City codes and ordinances have been created to protect the health, safety, and quality of life for residents of Yucaipa." I am a resident of Redlands whose property shares your City of Yucaipa boundary lines on three sides and I am as much a resident of Yucaipa as I am of Redlands. Although I pay taxes to the City of Redlands and abide by their codes, ordinances, and regulations, I rely almost entirely on Yucaipa businesses to provide most of the goods and services, including public safety and medical emergency services I need to survive. I attended Yucaipa schools and taught at both Yucaipa High School and Crafton Hills College. I am as much a part of the community as any of the commercial business operators and residents of Yucaipa. In truth, some property owners who lease properties on Outer Hwy. 10 live in neighboring cities or counties and are, for the most part, absentee landlords who show little regard for the conditions made on their frontage road properties, even those that violate the Yucaipa Municipal/Development Code.

So that you all may better understand my objections to this conversion from a static to an electronic messaging center, let me flash back to the past to share with all concerned an extensive, difficult, and unpleasant history with this billboard and nearby unshielded and improperly aimed and directed floodlights that compounded the issues with excessive glare and light trespass.

Flash back.

Since 1973, and for forty-eight years, we have lived up the hill behind the west -end of Outer Hwy. 10 commercial properties and chose to remain with Redlands as part of the Redlands preservation district when Yucaipa annexed the frontage road/then Highway 99 properties. In 1973, my mother, Dixie Benton, bought the property at 31107 and 31103 and in 1974 renovated the historic 1930s era Southwestern style white brick building and turned that into Dixie Benton Custom Interiors, making it a showplace that drew many clients on the way to Yucaipa and further points east. In 1981, she sold that property and it was later stripped of those improvements and amenities and is now the site of Yucaipa Trailer Center that adjoins the location of the billboard considered for conversion. That billboard went in after the property was sold to the current owner and before Yucaipa incorporated, I believe, but it was lower and smaller then. I do not recall when or how that installation was permitted and approved.

In 1979, I moved out of the renovated historic cottage at the rear of the 31103 sm

parcel my mother still owned and moved to Santa Barbara, where I remained until my mother needed my help, to return in 1985.

When I returned to provide financial support and medical care for my then aging mother, I called the sign company to ask if they could adjust the angle of the V shaped southeast facing side so that it did not face so much of my mother's home and continuously blind her both inside and outside on her property. I was met with extreme rudeness and a mean -spirited reply, "I have a ninety-nine year lease and ..." Because of his indifference and outward hostility, I never again approached him or the property owner who leased him the billboard.

In 2003, while caring for my then terminally ill mother, following first a heart attack and then a debilitating stroke, I was unloading medical supplies from the trunk of my car that was parked in my carport and had to place them on the ground to close the trunk lid. When I turned around to pick them up, I inadvertently faced the billboard and blinding glare coming from the unshielded floodlights on the bull -horn shaped fixture and pole standing just under and to the side of the billboard. Both lights were intentionally aimed and directed at the entire west -facing side of the house, partly to provide "security lighting" from the 31103 location, throwing intense white light and glare a good 700' back and up - slope to engulf the "little house" at the rear, the property at 31133, to a lesser extent the residence at 31119, and the residence at the rear of 31107 off Gold Hill Lane with more than 300' to the east and west included in that light throw.

The moment I was struck at eye -level by the two floodlights, I immediately suffered what welders call an "eye flash" so severe and blinding that the shock dropped me to my knees and I instantaneously lost vision in my left eye. The pain and burning was such that my eye began to swell to the point that I was totally unable to see. That pain and swelling remained for two weeks.

Caring for a terminally ill, partially paralyzed, and invalid patient on a feeding tube was difficult enough. But adding the loss of vision made it all the more unbearable. Those floodlights and glare came through the downstairs windows and hit her in the face in the hospital bed we had to set up in the living room. I had to keep car window sunshades in the window to try to shield her from the tortuous glare. She passed away in 2004 and never again had to deal with those hideous and unreasonable conditions imposed upon her and us by that property owner and his tenant.

There was nothing to be done but to live with the hideous glare for the next several years because the business owner was hostile and uncooperative, having blamed us for his many code violations, despite the City's intervention to explain that at no time had any complaint come from us but had been reported by Code Enforcement officers, themselves. For the next four years, I did extensive research on light pollution, floodlight glare, and on light trespass. -599-

Then, in 2010, I approached the property owner about the possibility of re- directing the light away from the residence. The glare from both the floodlights and the billboard was so extreme and intensely bright that I had to wear dark glasses to be able to turn into my driveway and make my way safely up the slope to my home. On those occasions when I came home after dark from teaching late afternoon and night classes at RCC Moreno Valley and had to stop to get my mail, I had to carry a shield of some kind just to be able to get out of my car and walk to the mailbox at the street level. I even had to wear dark glasses in my kitchen at night in order to prepare meals and to go outside to feed my animals or do needed watering. No effort was made by anyone to correct the problem.

On September 13, 2010, I sent a letter to John Mc Mains, the City's first Community Development Director, explaining the nuisance conditions and my unsuccessful "good neighbor approach" efforts to work with the property owner and his tenants to simply re -direct the light, a relatively easy task and how I was then treated by the business owner. I explained also how I then had no recourse other than to seek legal counsel and take recommended legal action.

To avoid more serious legal problems, I offered to pay for a professional lighting adjustment to benefit the business's need for improved parking and storage lot security lighting. Each consultant who came to look at the situation told me it was what they called in the profession a "technically faulty installation." Finally, the business owner and property owner agreed to meet with my attorney and theirs to observe the floodlights first-hand and determine the nature of the condition.

After a year of waiting for both lawyers to be free to meet at my home to observe the floodlights compounded by the billboard glare, the two agreed that it was, in fact, a defensible nuisance. I gave Mr. Mc Mains a Power Point presentation I had created to help him educate staff on light pollution and to encourage him to adopt the Dark Sky Association's Model Lighting Ordinance as other neighboring cities had done to reduce glare, trespass, and light pollution. I even offered to write the ordinance for the City, myself, but no change or response came from that. (See letter attached)
I then arranged to have the abatement done; the lighting company came out at dusk and spent three hours perfecting not only those obsolete fixtures, but re -adjusted all the unshielded small floodlights attached to poles or structures on the property. When the adjustment was finished and all agreed it was satisfactory, the attorneys, property owner, and lighting supervisor left. The next night, the lights were right back where they were and made worse.

I was shocked and called the lighting company supervisor and spoke then to the technician who told me that after everyone left, he was ordered by the

property owner to remain and then told to go back up in the bucket lift truck and put the lights back to where they were in the first place. He was then ordered to leave the property. The company wanted to refund my payment to them for their service, saying they had not met the terms of the contract. I told them that they had, in fact, met the terms and had gone over and above to adjust all of the wrongfully aimed and directed lights, insisting that they earned that payment.

Following that and over $1,000 in legal fees and related costs, I had to do it all over again. This time, I had to hire a legal representative to file a formal complaint with the City of Yucaipa. That complaint was found valid and after countless extensions of time, part of the bullhorn light was directed away from my home and driveway to resolve the problem.

As now you see, for the last 36 years, I have been forced to live with the extreme glare and trespass of the uncontrolled white light that emanates from the billboard, which is even more glaring between advertisements, and with what, to me, constitutes an unreasonable use of that property. Over the last several years, the property owner has applied for and gotten variances to increase the pole in girth and height to the point that it is now easily visible over and through the trees and ornamental shrubbery planted along the easement driveway that serves the two Redlands residents in the rear M provide screening and separation between the commercial and residential land uses adjoining the commercial properties.

Consequently, that enlargement, extension, and replacement of still un- shielded frame lighting contributes to a higher level of glare as the accompanying photos will show. That billboard now hits me at eye level if I should look out my upstairs bedroom window in an effort to see the once clearly visible and beautiful night sky and stars. I am now forever deprived of that small bit of "quiet and peaceful enjoyment of my property" as more specifically explained in the CCP and in nuisance law, generally.

In the study of California real property law, we are told that property owners have the right to the quiet and peaceful use of all of their property and environs without interference from adjoining property owners as a result of their property uses. Interference that deprives a property owner of that right can constitute the making of a private or public nuisance. A private nuisance is discussed in Title 10, Ch. 2 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, which states: "An action may be brought by any person whose property is injuriously affected, or whose personal enjoyment is lessened by a nuisance, as defined in Section 3479 of the Civil Code as: "Anything which is injurious to health, including, but not limited to, the illegal sale of controlled substances, or is indecent or offensive to the senses, or an obstruction to the free use of property, so as to interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of life or property, or unlawfully obstructs the free passage or use, in the customary manner, of any -601-

navigable lake, or river, bay, stream, canal, or basin, or any park, square, street, or highway, is a nuisance."
In this definition, we find that even making it difficult to walk, drive, or use a street or highway constitutes a nuisance. When glare is so bright that one cannot clearly see the edges of a driveway, the edges of a street, someone or something approaching from a short distance, or even a concrete freeway embankment wall due to glare across that wall and onto the pavement, that creates what lighting engineers call "veiling luminance" or a fog like glare that wipes out the details of information the human eye needs to see in order to drive or walk safely. Such conditions have existed in this location without being questioned or even considered and exist presently. The three levels of glare that can contribute to a health and safety risk are annoyance glare, discomfort glare, and disability glare. When glare and trespass reach such a degree that we cannot see normally and must shield our eyes for any reason, we can say we are being deprived of our basic right to enjoy our property with reasonable comfort.

Flash forward.

Why should I oppose the heightened intrusion into my home and property? Why should I accept the invasion of my right to privacy that you, the applicant, and the property owner plan to force on me as the only residential property owner to be bombarded and adversely affected by the proposed non-stop 24/7 flashing of brightly lit messages and images? Why should I allow the City of Yucaipa to degrade my property and quality of life any further? Let me tell you. Let me show you.

The open end and angle of the V-shaped billboard places a large portion of the face in clear view of my entire driveway, home, property, and most offensively, the windows of my front door, living room, and upstairs bedrooms. Despite the fact that the Development Code states that the City is not required to show city boundary lines on the MND aerial photos and maps that show the proposed locations of the proposed EMCs, I feel that the City is negligent in recognizing that my property sits on its own boundary lines. In more than one of those maps and photos, a line runs through part of my outlined parcel to suggest as much as one- fourth of it is actually within the City's jurisdiction and area considered part of the commercial property that could house and EMC. To the contrary, all of my property is within the City of Redlands rural -residential district. To allow any billboard of any size to so blatantly be angled to involve a residence in Yucaipa's jurisdiction or in Redlands's jurisdiction`is wrong, inconsiderate, inconceivable, unconscionable, and unacceptable.
-602-

The MND fails to note the very nature of the environment surrounding the location at 31103 Outer Hwy. 10, which is bounded on the west by the eastern and southeastern portions of the Crystal Springs Ranch and is adjacent to Gold Hill and Gold Hill Lane to include the foothills below Panorama Point and Sunset Drive. To the rear of that parcel is another Redlands rural -residential property consisting of at least 14.5 acres of active agriculturally zoned RR2 property that abuts my RR1 property. This is rural property that is naturally un-lit and intentionally so because property owners who live in rural areas choose to do so because they want to live "out in the country" and away from suburban or city lights. The MND also states that there is no impact on birds or any other wildlife identified as "sensitive to light." Nothing could be further from the truth. The trees that line our shared easement driveway, those that surround the small cottage on the 31103 property, and the trees on my property are home to many birds, including night -flying white owls, barn owls, screech owls, Great horned owls, homing pigeons, hawks, Mourning doves, and Fan Tailed pigeons that come all the way from Canada without fail to rest in the largest tree in my front yard every year on the anniversary of my mother's passing on April 3 rd
Gold Hill Lane, in close proximity to the billboard, has historically served as a wildlife corridor for deer, coyotes, mountain lions, bobcats, raccoons, opossums, rabbits, squirrels, skunks, and other animals that travel down the canyon for water from Crystal Springs.

The hillside behind this billboard is not even considered part of the "scenic vista" that all of Crystal Springs Ranch provides because it is outside of the City of Yucaipa boundary. If it were not for the City of Redlands Hillside Ordinance and rural character in this area, there would be no appreciable scenic views that are enjoyed by travelers who approach the real "gateway" to Yucaipa. Sadly, Outer Hwy. 10 that once had a few attractive businesses and antique shops that were at least inviting, have been replaced by less than attractive or appealing or even welcoming storefronts and commercial areas. What travelers see on the south side of I-10 has long been in need of serious attention and beautification.

Further, the MND states: "Development of the proposed EMC could result in a significant impact if it resulted in substantial degradation of the existing visual character of quality of the site and its surroundings. Degradation of visual character or quality is defined by substantial changes to the existing site appearance through -603-

construction such that they are poorly designed or conflict with the sites` existing surroundings." This is exactly why the existing billboard visually degrades my property and the approach to my property. Nothing conflicts more with my immediate natural environment than the intrusion into my home and life by this visual blight, eyesore, and aesthetically unpleasing degradation of my very quality of life. I could guess that there is not one of you who would be able to tolerate such a condition or look into and upon such a billboard day and night.
• The MND also states, "The project sites and their surroundings are characterized by parking lots, commercial buildings, the adjacent highway, or undeveloped properties with no native habitat that could support any candidate, sensitive, or special species; riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community; wetlands; and wildlife corridors. In addition, no Oak Trees, which are protected by the City ... are located on potential EMC sites." Did anyone from the City bother to study the habitat surrounding the site or to the rear of the site? At the rear of the site was a Black Oak that was toppled by excessive draining of waste water from the bathroom of the cottage at the rear due to faulty plumbing and abuse by multiple tenants. Oak trees come up by themselves here. I have one that is within the 300 ft. range of the site, actually.
• With respect to wildlands fires, the MND fails to state that the westerly end of Outer Hwy. 10 and the canyon area directly behind Outer Hwy. 10 between Gold Hill Lane on the west and Knoll on the east is within what is designated as a high fire district and is served and protected by mutual agreement between the City of Redlands and the City of Yucaipa Fire Departments.

Related to that is the recent explosion of a semi-truck/trailer engine that overheated at the top of the Crystal Springs Grade and across from Gold Hill Lane and part of the Yucaipa Trailer Center property and location of the proposed billboard conversion. I heard the loud explosions from my living room at 10:45 PM that Friday night about three weeks ago and rushed out to see fire bursting higher than the trees along my driveway and in very close proximity to the dry hillside on the west side of Gold Hill Lane and at the foot of Gold Hill on part of the Crystal Springs Ranch property. The driver of that "big rig" was assisted out of the cab by the owner of Angel Hands Towing that is situated at 31115 and directly in front of my residence. Redlands Fire took a video of the accident and posted that on their Facebook site the next day. Here is the link to that incident. https://fb.watch/7FNFPES4ul/ .

There are many such accidents at the top of this steep grade and up to the Yucaipa Overpass Bridge due to the speed of motorists driving in the two truck -climbing lanes, the last-minute attempts to change lanes to get over to the Yucaipa Blvd. on -ramp by trying to move between or ahead of the trucks that are often separated by only a car length, by foilowing too closely behind slower moving trucks, and by distracted driving. I routinely hear the crashes, observe the horrific scenes as first -responders arrive, and the Jaws of Life are used to extract passengers from the mangled vehicles. How many times in a year I call in such accidents I could not tell you. I raced down my driveway in my bathrobe with my cell phone in case I needed to make another call to 911. The billowing black smoke blew directly toward my home as that is a natural wind pattern, so I had to cover my eyes and nose and run home quickly to avoid breathing in the toxic smoke.

In regard to the impact of glare produced by the existing billboard that lights up at least 400 ft. of the concrete embankment and roadway in front of 31145, 31129, 31115, 31107, and 31103, the MND states: "Excessive or inappropriately directed lighting can adversely impact night-time views by reducing the ability to see the night sky and stars." This is an interesting observation because I am a member of the San Bernardino Valley Amateur Astronomers and I used to be able to set up my telescope in parts of the driveway and in my own front yard until the billboard was heighted and the pole lights were installed and aimed on a diagonal into my home and property. No more, thanks to the horrific amount of white light and glare produced by the billboard.

Of greater importance and significance to me as the most affected neighbor and opponent of this proposal is this statement: "Glare can be caused from unshielded or misdirected lighting sources, or by reflective surfaces (i.e. polished metal) that reflect light away from a structure. Impacts associated with glare range from a simple nuisance to potentially dangerous situations (i.e.,if glare is directed into the eyes of motorists). The proposed Project would result in additional lighting as the EMCs feature an illuminated display for viewing along Interstate 10." According to a provision in the Outdoor Advertising Act Permit from Cal Trans, we learn that "As a condition of that permit, "... the illumination shall not be of such brilliance or so positioned as to cause a hazardous condition on adjacent highways."
No matter how the technology dims or adjusts the light output, drivers adjacent to this particular location cannot afford to take their eyes off the roadway for even one second when following behind multiple semi -trucks that can easily and quickly slow to 25 MPH with no warning due to regular congestion on Thursday afternoons and nights, particularly, and on Fridays and Friday nights, when most of the accidents tend to happen during the early hours of the -605-

morning. I live with the movement and patterns of drivers on this segment of the freeway.

Nobody knows more about what happens along here than I do as the only resident with windows and a flat roof that looks right out onto the eastbound and westbound lanes of this freeway. The MND also adds to this discussion of glare and trespass this statement: "Another potential impact of structures that feature exterior lighting is from light trespass, where unwanted light from a source projects towards other sites and uses." The most questionable statement made follows with: "The proposed EMCs are intended to provide signage adjacent to Interstate 10 for travelers along the roadway and not to provide illumination for other adjoining areas." And what disturbs me even more is this statement: "As a technical element, LEDs are inherently highly directional in their emission of light." Supposedly, this new lighting is also designed to control spill light from the up -lighting of the sign "nearly eliminating 'sky glow' contribution." Really?
The conclusion drawn here is: "Therefore, the effects of this kind of lighting on light pollution are less than significant. Overall, the brightness of the proposed billboard above ambient light is less than significant with mitigation associated with the proposed LED technology and compliance with the OAAA standards." My response to this observation is, WHO SAYS SO? Finally, I invite you all to take a look at the accompanying photos and to explain to me how the present level of unwanted light, light trespass, and glare that looks like it is coming from a giant flashlight does not exist or is a "less than significant impact" and assault on my home and the surrounding property. I also invite you to come to my home to experience first-hand the way the present billboard is angled, illuminated, and designed to flood the roadway and driveway with white light. Until you all have seen this installation "up close and personal" with your own eyes, you should not rush into a decision based on the NMD prepared a year ago by someone not highly familiar with the residential properties that border your boundary lines and are affected by decisions you and city council make. At the end of the day, we must ask: who is suffering because of this condition? Who is carrying the burden and paying the price financially, emotionally, and physically? Together, you have the power, authority, and resources to solve the problem or resolve the issue.

But before you act, you need to ask and answer these even more important questions: Is it right for those who will be affected by the outcome? Is it good for those affected by the outcome? Is it fair for those affected by the outcome? And last, is it just for affected by the outcome?

In the classic film, LA Story, Steve Martin's character encounters a strange phenomenon in the form of the talking billboard that is there to alert to the freeway conditions. When he asks why it is talking to him, the sign answers this way.

My message to anyone who would aim EMCs toward truck -climbing lanes, at Yucaipa's most congested intersections, a heavily used overpass bridge, and the I-10 on and off -ramps at the ends of that bridge would be that with each 8 second message change interval, the flashing EMC message should add this warning:
-607-

September 13, 2010
Mr. John Mc Mains
Community Development Director
City of Yucaipa
34272 Yucaipa Blvd.

Yucaipa, CA 92399
Re: Floodlighting Matter and Need for Ordinance
Dear John,
As you may recall, I sent you an e-mail letter regarding my continuing efforts to find a solution to the floodlighting nuisance created by what lighting professionals have described as a "faulty lighting installation" on the property leased by Yucaipa Trailer Center at 31107 Outer Hwy. 10 South, Yucaipa.

My hope and intent is to bring a final and mutually acceptable resolution to this nuisance issue through a cooperative effort with the property owner and his tenant at my monetary expense because the tenant explained in an E-mail to his landlord that he could not afford to pay for the correction due to other parking lot security improvements he had recently made. I made this offer again because I arranged for the professional adjustment to be done several years ago, as I explained to you in that letter, and the electrical company is willing to come out again and make the adjustments needed to correct the problem and improve overall security lighting, as much as possible, for the tenant. It is now a matter of contacting the company and scheduling the job at a time that is convenient for all parties concerned.

As I pointed out, this can now be considered both a private and public nuisance because the lights hit drivers in passenger cars and SUVs directly in the face and eyes as they travel south on Outer Hwy. 10 and approach that business and others after dark. The lighting also distracts drivers coming up the Crystal Springs Grade and headed east in the truck climbing lane and especially just at the Yucaipa Blvd. off -ramp sign. From a distance down the hill, the lights look like headlights coming straight at drivers as the road slightly curves. Attention is directed away from the cars and trucks immediately ahead and behind drivers as their eyes have to adjust to the floodlight glare emanating from the business floodlights, including the lights on the bullhorn fixture, lights attached to the roof of the old gas station, and portable lights attached elsewhere.

Back in February, I did prepare and send to both the landlord and tenant easy -to -read information on how to recognize and correct the aiming and directing problems associated with the metal halide unshielded and high -power lamps so that they could do it themselves. The tenant indicated to the landlord that he could not physically make the adjustments because he needed a boom truck to do that.

The electrical company now has a newer boom truck and has offered to make the adjustments at a price just to cover the cost of "rolling the truck" with no additional costs for the labor involved. I think this is a more than reasonable offer and shows the good will of the company, as well. •1:

John Mc Mains
September 13, 2012
Page two
On a larger scale, however, I think it would be of great interest to the City of Yucaipa and its residents and neighbors to see the City make a long overdue effort to reduce light pollution and to conserve energy where commercial and residential lighting is concerned. The first step may be to revisit the "grand -father clause" that granted approval to old and existing structures such as light poles and possibly billboard structures in place prior to the City's incorporation. While that clause applies to a huge array of conditions that may now contribute to various forms of visual pollution and blight we see associated with older properties across the entire valley, we can take a step in the right direction to improve these conditions by starting with moderately and reasonably controlling commercial floodlighting that adversely affects some residents of Yucaipa, Oak Glen, Crafton Hills, and the bordering municipalities of Redlands and Calimesa.

Just for the sake of illustration, one homeowner in particular, whose custom designed home is situated on a hillside above Outer Hwy. 10, called me to say that she is hit in the eyes by the lights on a billboard situated between businesses on Outer Hwy. 10. Every time she goes out to feed her horses in the corral, she is absolutely blinded by the V-shaped billboard lights that are aimed up the canyon toward the hills. It's surprising just how far and how high the throw of these high-powered lights can be and how many homeowners are adversely affected by the glare but have given up efforts to correct those conditions, all because there is no lighting ordinance in place for either Yucaipa or Redlands! Far more people than I suffer the ill effects of light trespass and glare.

With that idea in mind, I have sent to you the international Dark Sky Association's recently adopted Model Lighting Ordinance (MLO) and a copy of an ordinance adopted by the County of Riverside. If we visit the IDA website and look at light pollution topics there, we find a list of those California cities and counties that have adopted such ordinances; sadly, the cities of San Bernardino, Yucaipa, and Redlands are not on that list. Yucaipa and Redlands, especially, should adopt such an ordinance to protect what is left of the rural living ideals and aspects described in their respective General Plans. Yucaipa and Calimesa once had a beautiful and undiluted view of the night sky, which was one desirable feature that drew people to both areas —the desire to move away from city lights, crowded neighborhoods, heavy traffic, and constant noise with opportunities to enjoy the night sky and area open space year round.

Most, if not all, of that beauty of the night sky is gone from our gaze and we must travel some distances now to observe even the Milky Way without the horrendous intrusion of sky glow.

When this issue first arose with Yucaipa Auto and Trailer Center quite a few years ago, I began the long and arduous task of performing research on light pollution and the related issues because both my mother and I, along with our family members, were constantly blinded by the blasting of the floodlights erected at what was then Yucaipa Auto and Trailer Center and is now Yucaipa Trailer Center. My efforts to seek a reasonable solution that would benefit both neighboring residents and the tenant were met with hostility, threats, and harassment. Only with the help of attorneys was my last attempt around 2004 partially successful and that took over a year to orchestrate and cost me over $1,000, only to have the tenant undo the professional adjustment that provided him with the best security lighting he could get with the "do-it-yourself' and less than professional installations. •1•

John Mc Mains
September 13, 2012
Page three
Out of those discussions with experts across the United States and Canada, and local lighting consultants and university level lighting engineering programs (IESNA consultants and research and guidelines included), I have learned a great deal about what is considered "good" and "bad" lighting and about the different types of lighting installations, bulbs, shields, etc.

To help you educate the public and possibly even members of the planning team and staff about light pollution, I have included on the CD I am providing you an interesting and varied assortment of professionally created documents. I am not an expert in the preparation of Power Point presentations or speakers notes, but I did the best I could to show you what I must live with and endure day and night because of a lack of education on the part of the property owner and his tenant and a seemingly lack of care about their own tenant and the residents whose homes are impacted by the floodlighting on the Trailer Center property.

The CD folders (13) are in no particular order and several are duplications of those I attached to the earlier E-mail I sent you a week or so ago. I would suggest that you begin with the "PowerPoint Slides for the City of Yucaipa" and open with that the "Notes to Accompany" those slides for your own review and consideration. For the benefit of staff who may view this CD, you might suggest this order:

1. The Dark Sky Association video on You Tube that presents a few short videos on light pollution in general.

2. The Light Pollution Map that shows Glare and Trespass (PDF file)

3. "Three Types of Light Pollution"

4. Weasner's Light Pollution Article

5. "Good Lighting Orientation" simple Power Point "How-to" presentation

6. "Lighting Plan Guidelines" (PDF file)

7. "Set G of the Good Lighting Slides" available from the Dark Sky Association

8. The "TLG Champion" website brochure showcasing some new designs in floodlights and shields

9. The Model Lighting Ordinance adopted by the Dark Sky Association

10. The Lighting Ordinance adopted by the County of Riverside

11. The Eye Health brochure that explains the adverse effects of bright lighting on the human eye if you have had an opportunity to drive down Outer Hwy. 10 around 8:30 PM in a passenger car to see how much of the roadway is illuminated by the bull -horn lights and how the direction and aim hits drivers in the eyes on approach to that business and beyond, and if you see how powerful and intense that hot -white light is and the impact it has on the aging eye, particularly, then perhaps you and the city attorney can find a way to encourage the business owner/tenant to do the minor adjustment to the lights on his own accord without penalty. If you find, however that the problem does not hamper or distract the public who use the street (drivers, motorcycle riders (tenant in the Little House's primary transportation), and pedestrians/joggers, then it will remain a "civil issue". -610-

John Mc Mains
September 13, 2012
Page four
It would be my hope that we could all work together to educate the business owners on all of Outer Hwy. 10 who use these outdated lighting installations that are poorly aimed and directed about the importance of light trespass and glare, and the effects of light pollution. Please give this some serious thought and discuss this with those who may decide it is time to improve these nuisance conditions by taking some steps toward adopting a lighting ordinance and modifying the "grand -father clause" that has made this nuisance condition possible.

Thank you for your time here, John. I hope what I can provide here will in some small way become useful.

Yours sincerely,
Pamela L. Smyth
-611-

Case No. PL202100001041GP A/CL P/DA
Proposal Case No. 21-104/GPA/DCA/CUP/DA
Photos to Accompany Continents on Proposal to Convert Static Billboard to EMC at 31103 Outer HwNJ. 10
The purpose of this photo narrative is to illustrate the adverse impact on the Redlands RR-1 residence and immediate environs attached to that property, namely the shared easement driveway made expressly to serve two Redlands homes situated up -slope and to the southeast area behind then Highway 99 and now the I- 10 freeway or corridor. The driveway was conveyed to the residence at 31133 and to that at 31119 by Grant Deed in 1945 and is attached to my property as a legally described separate parcel.

1. This is my 1926 renovated farm house home at 31133 Outer Hwy. 10 that faces Nvest and is on a direct southeast diagonal line with the present static billboard on the 31103 parcel. The upstairs bedroom on the left looks at eye - level on the sign, itself. and that glare forces me to keep the shutters closed and with blackout curtains on the inside as well to make sleep possible. The front porch landing vintage glass paned window is totally engulfed by the "movie screen" when the leaves are off the trees from fall to spring. The large Picture window to the right of the landing is the living room window that takes the worst of the alare and ambient light trespass with some hitting the dining room window next. I took this photo in January of 2019 on a bit of an overcast day. This house was featured in a Yucaipa-Calimesci t\elrs firror story when my mother, Dixie Benton, owner of Dixie Benton Interiors that had its location at 31107, bought and renovated this 1926 era farm house. -612-

2. These photos taken by Google Earth show the exact location of the billboard, the angle that allows the northeast facing wing to occupy my home and property, the offending floodlights in part abated, and the array of visual clutter and blight that impacts the scenic view from the I-10 on approach to the "gateway" of the City of Yucaipa. The hillsides in the back are part of Gold Hill and the Crystal Springs Ranch property that is on the west of Gold Hill Lane off Outer HN.%y. 10 at the dead end. The lights along this frame shine upward to add more glare and light pollution to the surrounding natural environment.

This photo clearly shows how the northeast wing of the billboard is directed straight toward the tall Eucalyptus trees that line my driveway and because of the elevation of that up -hill slope, the billboard nearly faces the front of my home in front of the tallest tree in the background.
-613-

The photo below provides a wider shot of the entire area impacted by the billboard's present angle and angle. The front porch and rear yard areas of the little cottage in the rear of the 31103 property is fully engulfed by the billboard glare; but it is a rental and the occupants keep the front -facing windows covered and do not sit on the front porch or use the rear yard. Directly across from that cottaue is my two-story home at 31133. The trees along the driveway are frilly emblazoned with glare from dusk to dawn, so much so, that no one needs a flashlight and can drive up the driveway without the use of headlights. -614-

I
AL,
-615-

FOOD
This photo shows how the southeast facing wing points right at the cottage in the rear. 1f you drew a line from the edge of that wing to the opening between the tallest tree in the background the the closer tree in front of the cottage, you would find that the line hits the peak of my house as it is elevated above the ground level of the billboard property.
-616-

The photo below shows my "front yard" as it appeared a few years ago. My driveway entrance is in front of the Nvhite truck. At night, we drive facing head on the billboard and glare. The entire pavement here from the truck to the concrete embankment wall is totally involved with light, which is not supposed to be the case as such glare causes "veiled luminance" and tends to white out some of the needed visual information we need to see curbs, mailboxes, and even pedestrians walking or riding a bicycle down the driveway. Unfortunately, a few- years ago, a new tenant took possession of the property at 31115, the used car lot that originally was a custom built four -bedroom home before the City incorporated.

That tenant cut down the Elm tree at the edge of the driveway that provided greatly needed shade, cooling, and screening for the private residential driveway and separation from the commercial properties. He also cut down to below fence level all of the existing mature drought tolerant ornamental shrubs hand-picked and placed by Mr. Dangermond of Dangennond's Nursery in Redlands in 1973.

He then cut down all of the tree limbs across the rear of the building that provided shade and privacy along my adjoining property line, thus opening up my house -617-

and yard to more light trespass and glare. All trees and shrubs provide for the health of the environment and are a valuable asset to property owners. The loss and destruction of over fifty years of mature and beautiful landscape is immeasurable.

At.
t
,jam,'
r-
.. ; i aAm

3. The following photos show what happens at night at this end of Outer HvVy. 10 and the history of light trespass and glare caused by the unshielded truncated bull -horn floodlights next to the billboard as explained in the comments. These are in slide format and were given to City of Yucaipa Community Development Director, John Me Mains, in 2013. -620-

THE FOLLOIA" iG SLIDE PHOTOS WERE TAKE%i %%r H A
D1GrTAL PORT AND SHOOT CAMERAWITH VERY UMUED

TELEPHOTO CAPABILITIES
-jos s sEu -R O—A'§V� X994--.tp"z-2 -`:=
fwk.:KY 2413 fY paste £o*> K A pc r--"-
si
±r> z.cwrtfur3 : �`.:�rr sx _ i� twxr Fax
IWO Awr&- :e4-= W-SW. ff,-M?r-Y PU'r 4MLI.d'"ry
- Zak$iP---VWW-Y IV T.S LTw a—
%ia"'Ff434i b'.BaFL't�l R'7.24 9ITlA, �;�:
%Few of Taller Lot & Light Fixtures from My Driveway hear Rustic Arch Approx. zoo ft. Upslope with Ught Surru tg in Daylight
Location of Offending Source Pole and
Position of Metal Halide Lights
-621-

.v--:\J'�•=°d.�_ _ _% Haw'
LICN*TR:�?_ :_..___REAL. OhT'. Tia-`:`_:-

4. The following photos bring us current to shoe how the light invades my home and property from 2015 to the present time.
-622-

The photos below were taken on Thursday, September 2; 2021 between at 8:59 PM while standing near the large Eucalyptus tree that stands at the comer of the curving approach to my rustic gates. He was situated about 18 feet west of the wooden gates and approximately 220 ft. up -slope from Outer Hwy. 10 and across from the front porch area of the cottage in the rear we can see facing the billboard directly as it sits up -slope at the rear of that same parcel. The stand of bamboo and the trees are totally lit by the white light as are all of the trees and shrubs along the driveway from the top of the slope to the street. The photo on the right captures the way the unshielded base/frame lights throw unwanted spill light directly to where the photographer was standing. The small area in front is a turn -out for residents to use when another vehicle is coming up from the street. -623-

The photos below were also taken on Thursday, September 2, 2021 between 8:59 I'M and 9:52 PM and show how the light emanating from the billboard creates «-bite light and glare intense enough to simultaneously hit both my living room windows facing west and my front door entry hall window facing north and the I-

10. There were no lights on anywhere in the residence and none outside in the naturally un-lit rural environment on this moonless dark night. The blue light emanates from a surge protector sitting on the floor at the corner of the interior wall that opens into the front door entry hall area. The red light is from my television converter box that sits above the television set that is recessed in a small end table. All of the white light is filling my front yard and entire house with light as though this was natural sunlight we might see mid -day and enough to frilly illuminate the stained glass pieces in both windows. -624-

The next shots are close-ups of what the light does directly in front of the living room window. Again, the brightness of the light captured here from outside is the normal amount of white light that strikes my home from dusk to dawn. Imagine the dizzying effect now of electronic messages and images moving and flashing into these windows once the billboard is converted. The billboard is partially hidden by the trees and is just to the right of the butterfly. The light below is -625-

coming from the car lot business below at 31115. The light to the far right appears to be a blend of floodlight glare from the 31115 parcel and the billboard light.

The next two photos show the light filling the vintage Oak paned front door at the top of the rustic porch landing. When the leaves are off the trees, the entire window is filled «rith the billboard's current advertisement that hits me at eye - level. The photo on the right was taken from the arch that leads from my kitchen to the living room. In that, you can see my kitchen cabinets illuminated, the living room window, and a hint of my dining room table area and drapery that I keep closed some of the time at ivght for privacy because that window faces my gates and the cottage across the way.
-626-

As you can see here, the glare goes all the way into my kitchen and lights up part of my rear exterior wall, Na-hich is where the photographer was standing to show this level of intrusion even into my kitchen. The windows were designed as architectural features for the purpose of bringing the outdoor natural environment and the light in. The house is surrounded by trees and windows do not need to be covered because the house sits at least 150 ft. back from the driveway and is almost completely private. The privacy created by the trees along the fence line and property line behind the 31.115 abutting parcel has been destroyed now, opening my home and property to view when it was totally hidden before.

5. Finally, the photos below show the Caltrans landscaping crew at work during March. 2021, on the north side of I-10 and the eastbound lanes just west of the Yucaipa overpass bridge as they made improvements below the sound wall that sits directly across from my house and property. I include these here because the east -facing wing of the billboard is directed in such a way that the EMC messages will hit these homes. their windows, and side and rear yards.

The two-story house on the far left will be lit up both downstairs on their patio and in the backyard and in the upstairs windows that face southwest and toward the billboard.
•

W,
2021/03/30
M'
2021/03/30

The following photos were taken by myself on Thursday, September 2, 2021 between 8:59 pm and 9:52 pm. It was a moonless night and the only ambient light was from the outside billboarc No artificial light sources affected the naturally dark, semi -rural setting. No neighboring house lights were within the shooting range to influence the capture of the ambient light coming from the light source being photographed, which was the static V-shaped billboard located next to th 31107 Outer Htivy. 10 business and on the 31103 parcel. The photo showing the billboard as se from the gravel driveway was taken from near the center of the driveway, approximately 15 ft. and somewhat in front of the entrance gates to the 31133 residence at a distance of approximately 220 ft. up -slope from the street.

The interior shots were taken in total darkness with no artificial light turned on within the residence to affect the capture of the billboard light hitting the large glass living room �N indow. was surprised to see the light from the billboard illuminates the hanging stained glass pieces in that window from outside. The light from the billboard could clearly be seen in part of the kitchen area and hits the east exterior wall there. The front door entry hall glass -paned door ova also totally dark, except for the ambient light coming from the billboard as the only visible ligh source.

From my observation, the outside trees provided some shielding from the billboard. When wins comes, and the leaves fall, the lighting coming from the outside billboard will be much worse.

Bruce Herwia
-630-

CITY OF YUCAIPA PLANNING DIVISION

PROJECT NOTICE
DATE: August 24, 2021 ��lv�s'i
CASE NUMBER: PL20210000104 1
APPLICANT: Leonard and Company - 0V
PROPOSAL: Case No. 21-104,,GPAlDCA/CiPI'DA: A General Plan Amendment and'Development Code Amendment to permit off -site advertising Electronic Messaging Centers (EiIICs) within the City of tlgajpa, and a Conditional Use Permit and Development Agreement to pennit an EN4C that will replace an existing s abE b'Iboard located on an existing commercial property at 31103 Outer Highway, APN: 0300-101-19 ', OC' \�' LOCATION: 31103 OUTER HWY 10 APN: 030010119;
ATTENTION PROPERTY OWNERS AND REVIEWING AGENCIES: The development proposal listed above has been tiled with the City Planning Division. You are invited to comment because your property is near the proposed project. Your comments must be received by this office no later than September 07, 2021. Comments received after this date mieht not be considered in the decision. Please refer to this project by the applicant's name and case number indicated above. If you have no comment, no reply is necessary. If you have any questions regarding this proposal, please contact Benjamin Matlock at (909) 797-2489, ext. 261. You may send your comments to the City of Yucaipa Planning Division, 34272 Yucaipa Boulevard, Yucaipa, CA 92399, or via FAX to (909)790-9203.

If you want to be notified of the project decision, print your name clearly and legibly on this form and mail it to the address above along with a self-addressed, stamped envelope. All decisions are subject to an appeal period of ten (10) calendar days after an action is taken.

COMMENTS (If you need additional space, please attach additional pages):

SIGNATURE � � 5�', f2l-Ik.AT.
g' ° � AGEN
Cl
5 PRINT N1\�Vfq ADDRESS ff' Ct J}/iuy tv "

IF YOU CHALLENGE ANY DECISION REGARDING THE ABOVE PROPOSAL IN COURT, YOU MAY BE LIMITED TO RAISING

ONLY THOSE ISSUES YOU OR SOMEONE ELSE RAISED IN WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE DELIVERED TO THE PLANNING DIVISION AT, OR PRIOR TO, THE TIME IT MAKES rrS DECISION ON THE PROPOSAL OR, IF A PUBLIC HEARING IS HELD ON

THE PROPOSAL, YOU OR SOMEONE ELSE MUST HAVE RAISED THOSE ISSUES AT THE PUBLIC HEARING OR IN WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE DELIVERED TO THE HEARING BODY AT. OR PRIOR TO, THE HEARING.

DUE TO TIME CONSTRAINTS AND THE NUMBER OF PERSONS WISHING TO GIVE ORAL TESTIMONY, TIME RESTRICTIONS MAY BE PLACED ON ORAL 'rESTI1vIONY AT ANY PUBLIC HEARING ABOUT THIS PROPOSAL. YOU MAY WISH TO MAKE YOUR COMMENTS IN WRITING TO ASSURE THAT YOU ARE ABLE TO EMPRESS YOURSELF ADEQUATELY. cc: Surrounding Property Owners
Fire Department
Engineering Division
Building & Safety Division

CALTRANS
City of Redlands
—631—

�/America
Research Shows that Digital Traffic Safety
Messages Contribute to Highway Accidents
and Fatalities
Posted April 28, 2022 by Rebecca Aloisi
A new study suggests that digital highway signs that are designed to encourage safe driving contribute to an increase in nearby traffic accidents.

The study, published in April 2022 by the American Association for the Advancement of Science on science.org, looked at several years of data from Texas to find that the number of vehicle crashes increased by an average of 4.5% in the 6.2 miles following signs displaying year- to-date road fatality statistics. Although these signs were meant to encourage safe driving, the research suggests that they have an opposite, distracting effect. "When you're on the road, your eyes belong on the road. Signs that take your attention away from the road and break your concentration are going to cause distracted driving and accidents, no matter what message they're trying to convey," said Scenic America President Mark Falzone. "This study just adds to the body of research telling us that digital signs including billboards are traffic safety hazards that don't belong on our roadways." -632-

Texas h I ghv—v, crash data bit\Necn Auzust 20 12 and
?-7 1i f as I eparment, of Franspor-Lation (I'xL)OT') displayed d r - W -J ate h i a hNx a N fallal i t i e s as a n i e a n s 0 f e n c o it r a �i n g sa e F ,mans appeared to have an opposite effect; the study authors noted an increase in accidents dov, nstrearn of these signs during the weeks when such messaging was presented. In reviewing the data. the researchers found no difference in results when controlling for time of day. weather. vehicle type. driver age group. driver gender. and other variables.

The researchers concluded that the fatality messages caused an additional 2.600 crashes and 16 deaths for year. costing about S380 million each year. By applying this anticipated trend across the 28 states that used such messaging, the impact of this messaging platform and tactic multiplies. According to the nearly National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. near39.000 C, I -
Americans died in traffic accidents in 2020, the highest number since 2007.

In 2021, the Federal Highway Administration determined that displaying traffic fatality statistics was not in appropriate use of these electronic messaging signs. The F-H\VA Outlined acceptable c ;'ell real-time tra\ el
uses I'Or these SiLMS. SUCh as alei ting ti-a\ c1n's to traffic conditions and i-el in f'orillation.
"Signs and digital billboards like these Nvith changing messages serve one purpose: to catch drivers' attention. which contributes to distracted driving, traffic accidents, and deaths. We've seen studies from Alabam.i. Florida. and around the world, and they all point to same - conclusions." added Falzone. "Any state or cit\. that wants to add more signs to its roadways needs to take these risks very seriously."
-633-

ARE YOU LISTENING CITY OF YUCAIPA?

WE RESPECTFULLY ADD TO TEXAS UNITED'S MESSAGE

ONLY YOU

CAN PREVENT ACCIDENTS

AND SAVE LIVES
THINK ABOUT IT!
-634-

YOU'RE PLANNING TO BUILD WHAT?
AND YOU WANT TO PUT IT THERE?
I DON'T THINK SO!
-635-

2021-09-02 Nu:42 IST -
+12562892783' PAGE 1r 1
August 31, 2021
TO: City of Yucaipa Planning Division
FROM: Scenic Los Angeles (A Chapter of Scenic America)
Patrick Frank, President
RE: Case No. 21-104/GPA/DCA/CUP/DA
This is a public comment that should be added to the case file on this matter.

Scenic America and its Los Angeles Chapter, Scenic Los Angeles, oppose the above -titled action.

There are multiple reasons for opposition: Aesthetic, Zoning precedents, and Depressed property values, but I will focus here only on the safety aspect, which is considerable.

Two studies done in 2017 by a team at the University of Alabama, Birmingham found that placing a digital billboard next to a freeway increased the accident rate by 25% at the Florida location and 29% at the Alabama location. I will fax the summary of this report under separate cover.

Proponents of digital advertising often cite the study done by the Federal Highway Administration in 2011 which found no significant driver distraction from digital billboards along roadways. However, this study was neither peer -reviewed nor properly published.

Quoting from the analysis by Jerry Wachtel of The Veridian Group:

The reviewers of the FHWA report were not identified, and the draft report was not made available to the public. The comments of two of the three reviewers (the third did not provide meaningful or comprehensive comments) were so critical of the draft report (stating, in essence, that the report's findings about eye glance durations to billboards were not credible) that FHWA spent the next 33 months revising and rewriting the report. A final report, which was not peer reviewed, was released on the agency's website on December 30, 2013, although the report was dated September 2012. Although the unreleased draft report was given the official agency report number FHWA-HEP-11-014, the final report remains unnumbered and unpublished.

Simply put, if the digital billboards are installed as proposed, there will be more accidents at that location on the 10 freeway. It can't be stated any more clearly than that. Speaking for Scenic Los Angeles and for the thousands of motorists who will pass these signs, I respectfully urge the board to deny these requests.
-636-

LU
U
-X
CL-
'N
MIIA IVION 02
Ad iff WRII ...

A, �N
`j� � j j��/�'f/� j�/// ;%/� /�i�j �/�a 'ij% % ;; ��f �// ,f� ff . '%% f' 0, m
jj // / �/ ' /�� /f // / J/ /fir i/ > �, ji_ /%i j r
ve
/'//!/�� '/ / //��f/ //ice % !,//i 'f! if i ./ f /'
VON X No
KEN
V/ V
g
idl
X,
R
..... .....

Im mi'
ty
Presentation to the TRB Subcommittee on Digital Billboards 2017 TRB Annual Meeting
January 9, 2017, Washington, DC
low U
;w S pm 01%
-637-

l'7
CV
UJ
C.0
S
CL
U"1
W
Q'i
CJ
17,
CV
CU
U"A
"r
• Investigate links between Digital Advertising
Billboards- Distraction -Traffic Safety Risk
• Multi -state and multi -facet approach
" �,, r.., �e %: % .. �� f • �.1 � ; � /". G: � /r.. J f .. /$ % �y� �/, �/i �.�, ire ; �... r .,.% �.. �,% �., a,r �•..✓ .c ..% '" r o . i'.I .,,/ S � G . •,.r s a S 2, •.% '. , '%r yr / '..% . : =../ /% of '.,/ ..%'•,.. % •,% ':' a 4... p ; '•. % ,.• a o '. '.,./ j, "r c % : ,.i t :.%t d r
CV

LLJ
U )
, A1111" q Brightness and contrast with surroundings
• Messages changing suddenly
• Realistic imagery
• No acclimation with message
• Potential for message sequencing
• Potential for interactivity with driver
-639-

U")
C�)
C4
S
Cv
CU
U'l
i'
• IVI
eta -analysis studies
® crash studies of historical trends
® Laboratory studies
® Naturalistic studies of driving behavior

U')
LLJ
M MY
• Overall, the state -of -practice synthesis suggests that of correlation between digital
advertising billboards and increased driver distraction. • However, local conditions, experimental settings,, and other factors may play a role in the that
digital advertising billboards have on traffic safety
I/w/M M/3
-641-

an d
Survey driver's
of perc/-eptioris
toward
digital advertising
billboards
- Demographics/Exposure
- Perceived safety and efficiency
- Regulations
Online
- 295 AL; 429 FL
-642-

Ur
LLJ
1'!
cv
CQ
Ur
7 t
Are billboards distracting in general?
46� o
r
.. Yei
.....................................................................................................................:

No
tJ,,ulr.d
............_...........__................................................................................................

Are digital billboards more distracting
than static?
IN
WHO
i•5 Nc f 'rtra
Do you slow down to read digital
billboard messages?
j%%��i
...........

I'i,;rcty Sanvltia.u•, Ofhv:

L......................................................................................................................... .................................. ..................... ................ ............................ ......................:

Now often do you use info from
digital billboard messages?
-643-

CV
U'jst
.............
............ .............
............
.........

I ......

Age vs. Perception on More
520 2-:.25
T;
0, 55
56- C55
yew years
vp;)r> ye m S
Vpart
years
..............

Yews
......... ...............

Distraction of Digital Billboard
............... .......... .........
............ .. ....

H ........... ...........
s; 0 �ars 21-)5 26-35 36-15 56-f-,5 >65 years,
ye j rs Val 5 Years
Mm
CV

LO
ru
Ul
10, OF
W 'M04
W
MOM
Age vs. Long Glance at Digital Billboard
IN
YO.
.... . .....
m
rm 0,
V0. xJfICA
/11MMIN
MEN F/I W P11,
.......... ..... — ........................... Age ....... ........ .............. ....... .......

Age vs. Slow Down to Digital Billboard
........... ........ .................. " .............

IMIV V................................................. ...... .. .. ................ ..... ... ................. ...... . ........... .......

HE/ . ...........

ME' ............
.. ..............

RE,
Mg, po
7o . .....
ma
... ........ ....... �MV .........

W/ OF
VS,
. ........ 0011111

MINI SIR,
110
rini immm M/
/I/,/
'N'
/o/
65 r.

Age
.......... ....... ................ I I ......... ............. ........ ........ .............

IVFF PIRNOR
-645-

Q.' Should there be restrictions on the size and number of digital billboards for traffic safety?
........... .............. .................. ........ .................. ....... ...... ...... ....... ....... - ............ ...........

Age vs. Perception on Izestriction on Size & Number of DBBs . . .... ....... ..... . . .. . . .. . ......................... -- .... . ....... .... .......... ... ...... ........ ....... ...... I ...... * .................. ....... ........ ....... ..... ............. ................................... ..................... - .......
.
60 ,gifi//.
.R, O
...............
.R
.

N%
...............46U4O....... .I
.......

VYe
f
-'N
E.1Not sure ..........

VE / 7
......... . M, . AO?ci.....
0%

21.1 41 v
.............

NMI
MY
CL.

SIM,;
....... . . . . . . . . . . . . .
0 1 E/M ...... En
<1
v a ri
'0
S e a Is
4 6 .. 5 5 ve a iN 5 6 -6 v 6 a rs
.............. .......................
..................................

Age
...........
............. ........................................................................

IMM,
-�V MY
C"i

e x
• 'J I.J "A
t a Ye
Road users perceive
,r s t e o,
r ,amivers admit staring at digital billboards
longer without adjusting their speeds
• Responders overwhelmingly agree on ther-,�eeu iror
.,/'..rIcter regWaaions of billboards (related to the
location of billboards, size and number of DBBs)
-647-

LU
U
S
L
CV
Evaluate the distractive effects of roadside billboards through the use of the UAB driving simulator
* Developed driving • data collection protocol
® Developed driving simulator scenarios
16 mile simulated highway driving scenario, with a mixture of digital and static billboards
• Recruit participants (57)
® Data collection and analysis
•

U'I
* Length of Pe Gazt,
Percent of tine participants spent looking at billboards while driving
a Memory REcall and Recognitioll
Post -drive MEMory recall of information presented on billboards.

Driving Per.ormance
a) the numbe- of speed limit exceeclances, v>69 (mph)
b) the numbe- of road edge excursions, and
c) the total nimber of motor vehicle collisions

I
.............. .............................. ....................... ......... . ............. ......... o'l
..... .....
00 NO B111boni-d L'fli lo.attii 250 1' ra I Isitio I SOO Age (WOLIJ)
Middif, Di"frus
• Participants had fewer speed exceeclances when there was a billboard present • Teens, as expected, had more speed exceeclances than middle aged and older drivers M 01 W.
2111
-650-

C'7
U')
-1
W
(.D
S
CL
U")
W
C4
(Q
S
S
CV
CU
U'1
<J'
rl
t
In
4+
C\1
S
cr,
a--1
CV
v
Terns );-c�-s a'ic�li a.a iS.r= E►Irl r
oop
3t3;cpci 13 c
rf-I Sit' 1—U
-6`1-

Vj
LO
LLJ
CA -
...... . .......

0........................

Teens Drivers,
.. ............. ; ..
...................... ........... ....... ............

MiddleAge Drivers Older Drivers
Age Group
4-, No Billboard Present Static Billboard
500TI.Insition
25OD-ansition
RPM 01
-652-

U'A
;Ji
U')
IT
• Significant main effects of age group and billboard type were found
• Billboards drew the visual attention of teen drivers
significantly more than that of drivers in the other age M�
® Digital billboards, particularly those transitioning at 500 ft, evoked significantly more attention than static billboards • Teens had more speed exceedances than middle aged and older drivers
e Older drivers had poorer performance in the recognition and recall tests compared to middle aged drivers
-653-

0 'M pow
.......... , WMI/m/MMEM
Analysis of historical crash records in the
• Identification of digital billboards
• Select study segments (0.5 mile u/s + 0.02 mile d/s of DBBs) and control segments (farther d/s from DBBs
• Obtain historical crash data from reliable sources
• Perform spatial analysis of crash data (where and how far from DBBs) to find statistical relationships between crash rate and digital billboard presence.

LAM,
IT,

LU
LIJ
'-D
m Long, straight section of roat'
m No billboard inside the influence and non -influence zones m Good visibility
m Uniform traffic flow (AADT)
7 Similar roadway geometry (e.g. lane number, lane width etc.) -655-

Dub
0-2 mile u/s
—%t+solE= ire
IIUI1IQLR., UICAVI(Al11 VI CA 1.)FVIvMAl -IL--j
I—
v�
H
Cr)
'n
s -656-
cv

%/ Identification of sites
• AL:
1-65; 1-20/59, 1-459; 1-565;
1-85;
1-10
• FL-
SR 826, SR 408, and
SR 528. 1-95,1-395,
and 1-4
v/ The impact of digital advertising billboard on traffic safety has been analyzed at 8 and 10 DBB locations on limited access facilities in AL and FL respectively
✓ 377 crashes in FL and 77 crashes in AL were used for analysis v/ Crash data analysis
Cra.5h Caunt ;� 106
C R = 0,5 * AADT * 365 * L * N
-657-

C•7
C'!
ti
f,J
W
C-5
S
W
LO
W
CO
C'7
u•
,y
CO
�cr
co
u')
S
S
SV
S
T.

S
C"J
CV
no •

co
cv
.ti
cy
CV
W
LD
LO
eu
C�7
cl
cV
co
uO
S+
Cr.
t=1
/,r/ /// /✓ / / / 1 / / r
,r ////,
G/ %i%�r %i/i%
`///�/ // ♦ �/ / �� ryy/��r
f�/ y/r�i
r
Summary C ;
rash Statistics at the AL Digital Billboard Locations
D1.3B Influence lone (L%S)
UBB Non -Influence Zone P/S)
�Cha.nge
Loc
City
Len,Crash
Total
C."rash
A•ADTCrash
Len.

Total
AADT
Crash
in
Crash
(rni)
Count
Rate"
(till)
Count
Rate`'
Rate
1 Mobile

0.4,53
G
3659'10

0.197

0.45 3
7 3(;$�)y(i

0.229
) 6.07
2 Mobile

0.467

1.5 47U500

0.374

0.237
9470500

0.442

18.23 3
Mont-
U.1 %
s

0. 30 3

0. 396
?

0.1 `� 1
-60.00
228640
22 364O
001110IN
�#
Madison

0.373
-
291580

0.202

0.373
l
2�)1S�Sli
0•(150
-?5.00
5 Huntsville

0.353
3 4531600.103

0.353
453160

0.J 37
33-3:�
6 llummlille
0,486
453160

0.075

0.207
0 453160

0.000
-100.00
7 Besserner

0.505
4 249950

0.174

0.505
249850
0,217

25.00 8
13cssemer
0,497
245480
!1.3911

0.497
0 ?4t 4gG

0.f10t)
-1{►O.UU

Summary Crash Statistics at the FL Digital Billboard Locations DBI3 Influence Zollo ([.J,'S)
DB,8 Non -Influence 7one (D/,)
'N) Change
Loc.

City
Lan.

TO tal
Crash
Len,Total
Crash
in C"Al
Crash
AADT
Rate`
(1-ni)
Crash
AADT
Rate'
Rate
Count
-Colint
Detrav

0.23 1
195,000
0,041

0.54 14
193,250

0.245
501.70
Beach
Miami

0.39 13
123,808

0.492

0.2) 1
9 143.333
M46

11.06 Doral

0.40 21
210,000

0.457

0.3.5 36
. . .......
211,667
.......................

0.888
.... ---

94.38 ......... -- ..........
4 .......... -- .......

Miami
.... --

0.20 ............ ..................
15 -- ....................
162.,900
-- ......
0,841
....... ................

0.20 .
41 160,720

2.330
177.04
5 0.19
97 245,000

3.806

0.26 35
451,543

0.977
-74.32
6 Hallandale
-0.28
54 2112,389

1.510

0.1-4
15 238,253

0.479
-6S.39
Beach
7 F.".1tonville

0.40 3
160,000
0-06
0,40
3 151,500

0.090

5.61 8
(,)rlovi.qti
(). 116
1 60,000

0.085

0.17 2
60,000
0,358
3291.53
011111do

0.40 2
42,750

0.214

0.17 0
---

0.000
-100,00
to
Tampa

0.40 8
153,750

0.238

0.34 `7
153,929

0.244

2.82 "M

VIONIVII NO/
• From the analysis on crash rates by
location it is found that:
• Crash rate is 29% higher at DBB influence
zones in Alabama, compared to non -influence
zones
Crash rate is 25% higher at DBB influence
zones in Florida, compared to non -influence
zones
-661-

ca
vJ
LO
C-i
W
Cl)
+.T
CA-
Summary Statistics by Crash Type- AL
Crush Type
t;p4tre�n�
Crash COHIIT Crash (tale r
Docvnstrcani
C ras CountC;ra�1T Reiter
%Chang e in
Crash Rate
Non -collision
1 0,005
0 0
._100.00
Single Vehicle Crasb
7 0.0'2
1�

0.045

40.63 I
Angle (front to side) Same
DiTt Cf i011
1 0,005
0 0
-100.00
Rear End
11 0.050
7 0.039
-22.00
Sidc Impact (90 degrec5)
1 0.005
0 0
-100.00
SidwNipe — Same Direction
Record from Piper System
h 0.02?
_..... .. .
?2 0.099
_ _ _ 0�
1 ;
..................

0.072
.... '.10UAU ......
-27.27
Total Crashes
49 U.22)
28 0.150

9.1.1 -662-

Summary Statistics by Crash Type- FL
Upstream
Dowastroarn
Percent Change
Crash TypeCrash
in Crash Rale.

Count
Crash kate2
Crash COLITII
Crash Rate-
Rear -end
82 0.373
99 0.373
-o. 12
Sideswipe
81",

0.346
40 0.187
-45.774
Collision with Fixed
43 0.222
21 0.098
-55.84
objectsi-
klediaii Croswvor
J.

0.041
2 0.063
5 4.2 7
1 .1 1 ractoriTrailer Jackknifed
1 0.028

0.000
-100.00
Total ("raslics
2 J 5

0.909
162

0.609
-24.79
-663-

* From the analysis on crash type it is found
that:

In Alabama, out of 7 crash types, the number of
crashes for all crash types except single vehicle
crashes is higher at DBB influence zones
In Florida, out of 5 crash types, all crash types
except median crossover type are over-
represented at DBB influence zones

Summary Statistics by Crash Severity- AL
("3'a1S11 Sc"dN,Ctf1'
Cl-aISII COUllt
Upstream
(.rash Ratel
Downstream
Crash Count Crash Ratel
Pucent Change
ill Crash Rato
Fatal Injury
€l.€)€ 9
1 0.01' 6
-3 3.33
Inca pa cita.Ong, llljlll'y
6 __.€1,027
1 0.00

77.78 �Ot7-illCa7l7alCFl�tt.Fil,� 113j1E1 j
�)
i:)
7 0.011
---
Possible. Injury
4 0.018
1 € ,006
-66.6 i
Property D-1111%Ige Only
(P DO)
35 0.15Is,
22 ().1,23
-22.15
Unknown
?

0.009
1 €).€ 06
-33.33
Total Cr"Ishes
49 (1.2_2 1
28 €).156
-29.1.9
-665-

Summary Statistics by Crash Severity- FL
Crash Severity
Upstream
.11 (,oullt Crash
Cras
Rate'
DOWDSLI-eWTI
.11 Count Crash Rate
Crash
Percent Change
in Cnish Rate
0,000
1 0.026
---
IIIJUry
98 0.478
72 0.274
-42.63
Property Damage Only
(PDO)

11.7 0.476
89 0.328
- 3 1 . () 3
-
Toud Crasllc%
215

0.809
162 0,608
-24.79

LLJ
k-n
IM
CL
The analysis on crash injury severity
reveals:

Higher number of more severe crashes at DBB
influence zones in Alabama and Florida, although
the overall number of severe accidents is small
Property damage only (PDO) type crashes
comprises a large portion of all crashes occurret'
in both Alabama and Florida
-667-

I
• Summary conclusions:
• While variations were observed from site to site, the overall results were consistent between the two states and showed higher crash rates at DBB influence study sites. • It is recommended to validate the results using more sites, longer study segments and larger sample of crash data
• Future study may incorporate the comparison of findings from AL and FL with other states
• Study of the impact of DBB placement (right vs. left side of the road; on premises and off premises digital billboards) is also recommended
• Study of the driver distraction level based on type of message and delivery method
relf"'.

Alabama and Florida Departments of
Transport-ation (ALDOT and FDOT).

Contributors to the study include:

CrJ
l J
CrJ
CJ
W
0 IT
Ct.

M
U'7
n
4+
CV
t✓
crr.

CV
-6 / 0-
i
j
CV

CITY OF YUCAIPA PLANNING DIVISION

PROJECT NOTICE
DATE: April 05, 2022
CASE NUMBER: PL20210000154
APPLICANT: General Outdoor Advertising
PROPOSAL: Case No. 21-154,,GPAIDCAICUPIDA: A General Plan Amendment and Development Code Amendment to permit off -site advertising Electronic ,'Messaging Centers (EMCs) within the City of Yucaipa, and a Conditional Use Permit and Development Agreement to permit an EMC on an existing commercial property LOCATION: 31547 OUTER HWY 10 APN: 030016113;030016114;
ATTENTION PROPERTY OWNERS AND REVIEWING AGENCIES: The development proposal listed above has been filed with the City Planning Division. You are invited to comment because your property is near the proposed project. Your comments must be received by this office no later than April 19, 2022. Comments received after this date might not be considered in the decision. Please refer to this project by the applicant's name and case number indicated above. If you have no comment, no reply is necessary. If you have any questions regarding this proposal, please contact Benjamin Matlock at (909) 797-2439, ext. 261. You may send your comments to the City of Yucaipa Planning Division, 34272 Yucaipa Boulevard, Yucaipa, CA 92399, or via FAX to (909) 790-9203.

SIGNATUREDATE I r' Z.4GENCY
PRINT NAME 1110ftlG'�!'1'i
4 t L.,t'� � Z- ADDRESS

IF YOU CHALLENGE ANY DECISION REGARDING THE ABOVE PROPOSAL IN COURT, YOU MAY BE LIMITED TO RAISING

ONLY THOSE ISSUES YOU OR SOMEONE ELSE RAISED IN WRITCEN CORRESPONDENCE DELIVERED TO THE PLANNING DIVISION AT, OR PRIOR TO, THE TIME IT MAKES ITS DECISION ON THE PROPOSAL OR. IF A PUBLIC HEARING IS HELD ON TILE PROPOSAL.. YOU OR SOMEONE ELSE MUST HAVE RAISED THOSE ISSUES AT THE PUBLIC HEARING OR IN WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE DELIVERED TO T1 iE HEARING BODY AT, OR PRIOR TO, THE HEARING.

DUE TO TIME CONSTRAINTS AND THE NUMBER OF PERSONS FISHING TO GIVE ORAL TESTIMONY, TIME RESTRICTIONS MAY BE PLACED ON ORAL TESTIMONY AT ANY PUBLIC HEARING ABOUT THIS PROPOSAL. YOU MAY WISH TO MAKE YOUR COMMENTS IN WRITINGTO ASSURETHAT HAT YOU ARE ABLE TO EXPRESS YOURSELF ADEQUATELY. cc: Surrounding Property Owners
Fire Department
Engineering Division
Building & Safety Division
City of Redlands
-671-

--.�.�_._.�,,.__ a_,�,.�_.._ ..� _.- _• J�_"f'.� At1 c �� .__.._ l% �!' �� A�; _Yn lti ^tr„ !n —�^�,� -. .._.__._.,�,�_.. _ �,�..._ /jiiil.L��.._�.<.'..«`w.,r�.�i✓2��•�L� �.0 `Z�f/_�.�i"V "_.G!!y . ��'.l_,_k^r� t+ VKA !•` c
J412
•- A-V &-,,
� h
t
1 r
-672-

APR/15/2J22/H1 09:0C A`�I Advancement Finance ?AX eta. 051 327 52'0 P. 0101

CITY OF YUCAIPA PLANNLNG DIVISION

PROJECT NOTICE
DATE: April 05, 2022
CASE NUMBER: PL20210000154
APPLICANT: General Outdoor Advertising
PROPOSAL: Case No. 21-154/GPA/DCA/CUPfDA: A General Plan Amendment and Development Code Amendment to permit off site advertising Electronic Messaging Centers (EIMCS) within the City of Yucaipa, and a Conditional Use Pen -nit and Development Agreement to permit an EMC on an existing commercial property LOCATION: 31547 OUTERHtkY 10 APN: 030016113;030016114;
.A.TTEN"rION PROPERTY OWNERS AND REV-IE'VI NG AGENCIES: The development proposal listed above has beeu filed with the City Planning Division. You are invited to comment because your property is near the proposed project. Your comments must be received by this office no later than April 19, 2022. Comments received after this date might not be considered in the decision. Please refer to this project by the applicants name and case number indicated above. If you have no comment, no reply is necessary. if you have any questions regarding this proposal, please contact Benjamin Matlock at (909) 797-2489, ext. 261. You may send your con e City of Yucaipa Planning Division, 34272 Yucaipa Boulevard, Yucaipa, CA 92399, or via FAX to (909) 790-9203.

If you want to be notified of the project decision, print your name clearly and legibly on this form and mail it to the address above along with a selfaddressed, stamped envelope. All decisions are subject to an appeal period of ten (10) calendar days after an action is taken.

COMMENTS (If you need additional space, please attach additional panes):

SIG�'ATURE_ DATEAGENCY
PRINT NAME`! / 6f ty CC/O ��- e / ADDRESS J( e IG,1� 1( dJ't t tom' u a'6,`
IF YOU CHALLENGE ANY DECISION REGARDING THE ABOVE PROPOSAL IN COURT, YOU ? LAX BE LBUTED TO RAISR;G CA
ONLY THOSE ISSUES YOU OR SOMEONE ELSE RAISED IN WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE DELIVERED TO THE PLAt\TNRVG DIVISION AT, OR PRIOR TO, THE TLV1E IT MAKES ITS DECISION ON THE PROPOSAL OR. IF A PUBLIC HEARING IS HELD ON THE PROPOSAL. YOU OR SOMEONE ELSE MUST HAVE RAISED THOSE ISSUES AT THE PUBLIC HEARING OR IN WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE DELIVERED TO THE HEARING BODY AT, OR PRIOR TO, THE HEARING.

DUE TO TIME CONSTRAINTS AND THE NUMBER OF PERSONS WISHING TO GIVE ORAL TEST12MONY, TIME RESTRICTIONS MAY BE PLACED ON ORAL TESTIMONY AT ANY PUBLIC HEAMG ABOUT THIS PROPOSAL. YOU MAY WISH TO M.AJ;2 YOUR COMt+iENTS IN %NTX SIG TO ASSURE THAT YOU ARE ABLE TO EXPRESS YOURSELF ADEQUATELY.

CC,. Surrounding Property Owners
Fire Department
Enoineerino DiAsion
Building & Safety Division
City of Redlands
-673-

Advancement. Finance
April 14, 2022
To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing in regards to the proposed installation of an electronic billboard on Outer Highway 10 (see attached). I strongly oppose this installation.

First of all, how does the installation of this sign benefit Yucaipa residents? There is no obvious benefit to the city residents at all, financial or otherwise.

Secondly, the proposed sign is far too large to put directly in front of a residential area. While the actual location of the sign may be considered commercial, my home is within 50 yards of that spot.

Outer Highway 10 is the only glimpse of Yucaipa that travelers on the 10 freeway get. For many people, this may be the only impression they get of what has become a beautiful town. Is an oversized electronic billboard really the impression we want them to have of this city? An electronic billboard of this size will also add to light pollution in this area, already impacted by the Chick Fil~jk sign, and as National Geographic states, light pollution "disrupts the natural patterns of wildlife, contributes to the increase in carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere, disrupts human sleep, and obscures the stars in the night sky." The only justification is the benefit of the sign company's profits, to the detriment of Yucaipa residents.

Thomas Gleisberg
-674-

ORDINANCE NO.408

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YUCAIPA

APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF YUCAIPA AND SAN DIEGO OUTDOOR ADVERTISING INC., DBA GENERAL OUTDOOR

ADVERTISING, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, TO ENABLE THE

DEVELOPMENT OF AN ELECTRONIC MESSAGING CENTER

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YUCAIPA HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. San Diego Outdoor Advertising Inc, dba General Outdoor Advertising, a California Corporation ("Developer") proposes to enter into a development agreement with the City of Yucaipa (herein, the "Development Agreement"), which is attached to this Ordinance as Exhibit "A," in connection with the development of an Electronic Messaging Center, and described in the legal description attached hereto as Exhibit "B," and incorporated herein by reference (the "Project").

Section 2. Government Code Section 65864 authorizes the City to enter into binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property for the development of such property in order to, among other matters: ensure high quality development in accordance with comprehensive plans; provide certainty in the approval of development projects so as to avoid the waste of resources and the escalation in the cost of housing and other development to the consumer; provide assurance to the applicants for development projects that they may proceed with their projects in accordance with existing policies, rules and regulations and subject to conditions of approval, in order to strengthen the public planning process and encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the private and public economic costs of development.

Section 3. The Project, including this Ordinance and the Development Agreement, has been environmentally reviewed pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Sections 21000, et seq. ("CEQA"), the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000, et seq.), and the City's Local CEQA Guidelines. A Recirculated MND was prepared and was made available for agency and public review and comment for a 30-day period beginning on March 28, 2022, and ending on April 27, 2022. Together, the RMND considers the potential environmental impacts that could occur as a result of the Project. Based on the analysis contained in the MND and other evidence in the record, the City Council, exercising its independent judgment, hereby finds that the project will not have a significant environmental impact with the adoption of the identified mitigation measures, adopts the MND, and adopts the attached Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). The documents and other materials constituting the record of proceedings are located at the Planning Offices at Yucaipa City Hall, 34272 Yucaipa Boulevard, Yucaipa, California 92399.

Section 4. On May 18, 2022, the Planning Conunission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Development Agreement. Notice of the time, place and purpose of the public hearing was duly provided in accordance with California Govermnent Code -615-

Sections 65867, 65090, and 65091, and the City's ordinances. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt an ordinance approving the Development Agreement.

Section 5. On June 27, 2022, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Development Agreement. Notice of the time, place and purpose of the public hearing were duly provided in accordance with California Government Code Sections 65867, 65090 and 65091, and the City's ordinances.

Section 6. The City Council finds that the provisions of the Development Agreement are consistent with the City of Yucaipa General Plan and comply with its objectives and policies.

The Development Agreement is consistent with and implements the objectives of the General Plan policies, including but not limited to CDL-4.6 as part of Resolution 2022-21.

Section 7. The City Council further finds that the provisions of the Development Agreement will provide opportunities for a City gateway feature near its offramps, and provide opportunities for advertising of local businesses and city -sponsored events, and is consistent with is consistent with CDL-4.7, and CDL-8.6 of the General Plan as design modifications have been included to enhance the Interstate 10 corridor.

Section 8. The City Council hereby approves the Development Agreement, contingent upon the related General Plan Amendment and Development Code Amendment enabling the Electronic Messaging Center Project both being adopted and taking effect, and authorizes the Mayor to execute the Development Agreement on behalf of the City.

Section 9. No later than ten (10) days after the effective date of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall record with the County Recorder a copy of the Development Agreement and the notice shall describe the land to which such contract applies.

Section 10. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a summary of this Ordinance to be published at least once in a newspaper of general circulation published and circulated in the City within fifteen (15) days after its passage, in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code; and shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance.

Section 11. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and effect at 12:01 a.m. on the thirty-first (31 st) day after its passage.

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 27`h day of June, 2022.

ATTEST:

David Avila
Mayor of the City of Yucaipa
-2-
-676-

Jennifer Crawford
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

David M. Snow
City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:

Raymond A. Casey
City Manager
-677-

EXHIBIT A

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT

EXHIBIT B

LEGAL DESCRIPTION
MOM

FREEWAY ORIENTED ELECTRONIC BILLBOARD

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT

THIS FREEWAY ORIENTED ELECTRONIC BILLBOARD DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is entered into as of this 271h day of June, 2022 by and between the CITY OF YUCAIPA, a California Municipal Corporation ("City"), SAN DIEGO OUTDOOR ADVERTISING INC., dba GENERAL OUTDOOR ADVERTISING, California corporation ("Company"). Hereinafter City and Company, are sometimes referred to as "Party" or collectively as "Parties."

RECITALS
This Agreement is made and entered into with regard to the following facts, each of which is acknowledged as true and correct by the Parties to this Agreement.

WHEREAS, the California Outdoor Advertising Act, Business and Professions Code, Section 5200, et. seq. encourages local entities and display owners to enter into agreements, including relocation or removal agreements, which allow local entities to continue development in a planned manner without expenditure of public funds while allowing the continued maintenance of private investment and a medium of public communications.

WHEREAS, the California Outdoor Advertising Act specifically empowers, and encourages, local agencies to enter into agreements, including relocation or removal agreements, on terms that are agreeable to the City and display owners and to adopt ordinances and resolutions providing for displays.

WHEREAS, Section 87.0725(c) of the Yucaipa Municipal Code proposed as part of Ordinance No. 393 will allow for the development of a Freeway Oriented Electronic Billboard.

WHEREAS, Company desires to construct one double face 14'x48' Freeway Oriented Electronic Billboard incorporating a changeable Message Display Center (or the "Project" as hereafter defined).

WHEREAS, Company has applied to the City for approval of this mutually binding Agreement, pursuant to the provisions of the Development Agreement Act (as hereafter defined), and the City Development Agreement Regulations (as hereafter defined), and other applicable laws.

WHEREAS, Company has a legal or equitable interest in the Property (as defined herein) as required by the Development Agreement Statutes and City Development Agreement Regulations. Owner of the Property, GARDUNO FAMILY TRUST 03/11/21, has consented to Company's application for this Agreement, and Company, as the lessee of the Property, as such terin is defined herein, has a legal and/or equitable interest in the Property and thus qualifies to enter into this Agreement in accordance with Development Agreement Law. The City and •:1

Company acknowledge and agree that Company is the tenant or licensee of the Property and thus is qualified to enter into and be a Parry to this Agreement under the Development Agreement Statutes. Additionally, prior to the execution of this Agreement, Company has allowed the City to view, but not retain, a redacted copy of the applicable lease which demonstrates that Company has a leasehold or license interest in the Property, which interest shall be maintained until removal of the Freeway Oriented Electronic Billboard from the Property.

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Yucaipa has found that this Agreement is consistent with the City's General Plan, the City's zoning ordinances, and constitutes a present exercise of the City's police power.

WHEREAS, in anticipation of the development of the Project, Company has made or will snake application to the City (in its governmental capacity) for certain approvals, entitlements, findings and permits required for the development and construction of the Project, including, without limitation: a General Plan Amendment, a Zone Text Amendment, and a Conditional Use Pen -nit.

WHEREAS, City and Company now wish to enter into this Agreement to memorialize the tenns and conditions upon which Company will have the right to construct and maintain a new Freeway Oriented Electronic Billboard.

WHEREAS, the City Council has specifically considered the advantages and impacts of this Project upon the welfare of the City and believes that the Project will benefit the City.

WHEREAS, this Agreement eliminates uncertainty in planning and provides for the orderly development of the Project in a manner consistent with the City's Zoning Regulations (as hereafter defined), the Applicable Rules (as hereafter defined) and the General Plan (as hereafter defined).

WHEREAS, to provide such certainty, the City desires, by this Agreement, to provide Company with assurance that Company can proceed with development of the Project. Company would not enter into this Agreement, or agree to provide the public benefits and improvements described herein, without the City's agreement that the Project can be developed during the term of this Agreement.

WHEREAS, the City has determined that, as a result of the development of the Project in accordance with this Agreement, substantial benefits will accrue to the public.

WHEREAS, on May 18, 2022, pursuant to the requirements of the Development Agreement Act, the Planning Commission of the City of Yucaipa conducted a hearing on Company's application for this Agreement.

WHEREAS, on June 27, 2022, pursuant to the requirements of the Development Agreement Act, the City Council of the City of Yucaipa (the "City Council") conducted a hearing on Company's application for the Project and this Agreement. •:

WHEREAS, the City Council has found and determined that this Agreement is consistent with the City's General Plan and all other plans, policies, rules and regulations applicable to the Project.

WHEREAS, on June 27, 2022, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 393 approving this Agreement, and such ordinance became effective on August 10, 2022.

AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the authority contained in the Development Agreement Act and the City's Development Agreement Regulations, as each applies to the City, and in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants herein contained and other valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereto agree as follows:

OPERATIVE PROVISIONS

1. Definitions. For all purposes of this Agreement, except as otherwise expressly provided herein, or unless the context of this Agreement otherwise requires, the following words and phrases shall be defined as set forth below:

A. "Applicable Rules" means the rules, regulations, ordinances, resolutions, codes, guidelines, and officially adopted procedures and official policies of the City governing the use and development of real property, including, but not limited to, the City's Zoning Regulations and building regulations, adopted as of the Effective Date, and specifically including Ordinance No. 393 processing in conjunction with the applications to entitle the Project.

B. "Business Day" means any day other than a Saturday, Sunday or California or Federal holiday on which banks in the City are customarily closed.

C. "City Development Agreement Regulations" means Article 13 of Chapter 3 of Division 3 of the Development Code (Sections 83.0301305 et seq) (as the same may be amended and or re -codified from time to time).

D. "Conditions of Approval" shall mean those conditions of approval imposed by the City in connection with the approval of the Project.

E. "Development Agreement" or "Agreement" means this Agreement.

F. "Development Agreement Act" means Article 2.5 of Chapter 4 of Division 1 of Title 7 (Sections 65864 through 65869.5) of the California Government Code (as the same may be amended and/or re -codified from time to time).

G. "Discretionary Action(s)" or "Discretionary Approval(s)" means an action which requires the exercise of judgment, deliberation or discretion on the part of the City, •:

including any board, agency, commission or department and any officer or employee thereof, in the process of approving or disapproving a particular activity, as distinguished from a Ministerial Permit or Ministerial Approval (as hereafter defined).

H. "Effective Date" shall mean the date this Agreement, fully executed, is recorded in the official records of the San Bernardino County Recorder. "Existing Billboard" means the sign as further described below in Section

6.0.(1) below.

J. "Freeway Oriented Electronic Billboard Sign" means the Freeway Oriented Sign as described in Exhibit `B," which includes two message displays, and which may also be referred to as the "Project" as defined herein.

K. "General Plan" means the General Plan of the City, as it exists as of the Effective Date.

L. "Ministerial Permit(s)," or "Ministerial Approval(s)" means a permit or approval, including, but not limited to, Building Permits, grading permits, shoring and excavation permits, demolition permits, zone clearances, and certificates of occupancy, which requires the City, including any board, agency, commission or department or any officer or employee thereof, to determine whether there has been compliance with Applicable Rules, statutes, ordinances, Conditions of Approval, and/or regulations, as distinguished from an activity which is included in the definition of Discretionary Action or Discretionary Approval.

M. "Processing Fees" means all processing fees and charges required by the City that are applied uniformly to all construction or development related activity including, but not limited to, fees for land use applications, Building Permit applications, Building Pennits, grading permits, shoring and excavation permits, hauling permits, encroachment permits, demolition permits, subdivision or parcel maps, lot line adjustments, street vacations, inspections, certificates of occupancy and plan check. Processing Fees shall not mean or include Public Benefit Contributions.

N. "Project" means the digital Freeway Oriented Electronic Billboard Sign as described in Exhibit `B," which includes two message displays. hereto.

0. "Property" means the real property described in Exhibit "A" attached P. "Public Benefit Contribution" means the payment from the Company to the City pursuant to Section 6.D of this Agreement.

Q. "Reserved Powers" means the power and authority of the City to enact regulations and/or take Discretionary Action if the same is expressly found by the City to be 4 •:

necessary to protect residents of the City, those employed in the City, or visitors to the City, from a condition that is dangerous to public health or safety or if the same is required to comply with California or federal laws (whether enacted previous or subsequent to the Effective Date of this Agreement).

R. "Subsequent Land Use Regulations" means any change in or addition to the Applicable Rules adopted after the Effective Date of this Agreement, including, without limitation, any change in any applicable general or specific plan, zoning, subdivision, or building regulation, including, without limitation, any such change by means of an ordinance, initiative, resolution, policy, order or moratorium, initiated or instituted for any reason whatsoever by the Mayor, City Council, Planning Commission or any other board, agency, commission or department of City, or any officer or employee thereof, or by the electorate, as the case may be, which would, absent this Agreement, otherwise be applicable to the Project.

S. "Zoning Regulations" shall mean the official zoning regulations of the City adopted as of the Effective Date of this Agreement.

2. Recitals of Premises. Purpose and Intent
A. State Enabling Statute. To strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the economic risk of development, the Legislature of the State of California adopted the Development Agreement Act which authorizes any city to enter into binding development agreements establishing certain development rights in real property with persons having legal or equitable interests in such property. Section 65864 of the Development Agreement Act expressly provides as follows:
"The Legislature finds and declares that:
"(a) The lack of certainty in the approval of development projects can result in a waste of resources, escalate the cost of housing and other development to the consumer, and discourage investment in and a commitment to comprehensive planning which would make maximum efficient utilization of resources at the least economic cost to the public. (b) Assurance to the applicant for a development project that upon approval of the project, the applicant may proceed with the project in accordance with existing policies, rules and regulations, and subject to conditions of approval, will strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning, and reduce the economic cost of development."
Notwithstanding the foregoing, to ensure that the City remains responsive and accountable to its residents while pursuing the benefits of development agreements contemplated by the Legislature, the City accepts restraints on its police powers contained in development agreements only to the extent and for the duration required to achieve the mutual objectives of the Parties. 5 •:�

B. The Project. The Company intends to develop the Property as described in the final plans submitted to the City, subject to the Applicable Rules and the Conditions of Approval. The Parties hereby agree that, subject to the exercise of the City's Reserved Powers, for the term of this Agreement, the pennitted uses, the density and intensity of use, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, parking requirements, setbacks, and development standards, provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes and location of public improvements, and the design, improvement, construction and other guidelines, standards and specifications applicable to the development and use of the Property shall be those set forth in the Applicable Rules and this Agreement, including the Conditions of Approval.

C. Existing Billboard Removal. The Company shall remove an existing static billboard located at 34855 Yucaipa Blvd (Accessor Parcel Number 0319-341-10).

3. Property Subject to Agreement. This Agreement shall apply to all of the Property.

4. Tenn of Agreement. The initial tenn of this Agreement shall commence on the Agreement Effective Date, and shall continue for thirty (30) years.

5. Changes in Applicable Rules.

A. Non -Application of Changes in Applicable Rules. The adoption of any Subsequent Land Use Regulations after the Effective Date of this Agreement, or any change in, or addition to, the Applicable Rules (other than changes in Processing Fees as provided in this Agreement), including, without limitation, any changes in the General Plan or the Zoning Regulations (including any regulation relating to the timing, sequencing, or phasing of the Project or construction of all or any part of the Project), adopted after the Effective Date of this Agreement, including, without limitation, any such change by means of ordinance, initiative, resolution, motion, policy, order or moratorium, initiated or instituted for any reason whatsoever and adopted by any board, agency, commission or department of the City, or by the electorate, as the case may be, which would, absent this Agreement, otherwise be applicable to the Project and which would conflict in any way with or be more restrictive than the Applicable Rules, shall not be applied to the Project during the tern of this Agreement unless such changes represent an exercise of the City's Reserved Powers.

B. Changes in Uniform Codes. Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement to the contrary, development of the Project shall be subject to changes occurring from time to time in the provisions of the City's building, mechanical, plumbing and electrical regulations which are based on the recommendations of a multi -state professional organization and become applicable throughout the City, including, but not limited to, the California Building Code, and other similar or related uniform codes.
-685-

C. Changes Mandated by Federal or California Laws or Regulations. Changes in, or additions to, the Applicable Rules adopted or made operative on or after the Effective Date shall apply to the Project if such changes or additions are specifically mandated to be applied to developments such as the Project by applicable California or federal laws or regulations. If the City or Company believes that such a change or addition required by California or federal law or regulation exists, then that Party shall provide the other Party hereto with a copy of such California or federal law or regulation and a statement of the nature of its conflict with the provisions of the Applicable Rules and/or of this Agreement. For the purposes of this Agreement, the City's determination as to the applicability of California or federal laws to the Project shall be final and conclusive.

D. Changes in Processing Fees Under Applicable Rules. The Project shall be subject to current and any future increases in Processing Fees imposed by the City, provided that such a change is applied on a Citywide basis and not just to billboards or to Freeway Oriented Electronic Billboards.

6. Company's Obligations and Entitlements.

A. Conditions of Approval. Company shall comply with the Conditions of Approval.

B. Reimbursement of Project Approval Costs. No later than the thirty (30) days following the Effective Date, Company shall reimburse the City for all of its costs to process the Project approvals, including legal and environmental processing costs related to the Conditions of Approval and preparation of this Agreement, if any.

C. Processing Fees. Company agrees to pay all Processing Fees, including City plan check fees, building inspection fees, and permit fees, at the rate and amount in effect at the time the fee is required to be paid.

D. Public Benefit Contribution.

Company shall pay to the City a Public Benefit Contribution. The Public Benefit Contribution shall be the greater of fifty thousand dollars ($50,000.00) per Freeway Oriented Electronic Billboard or twelve percent (12%) of the gross receipts generated by each Freeway Oriented Electronic Billboard paid in equal monthly payments each calendar year until removal of the Freeway Oriented Electronic Billboard from the Property after deducting any commissions of up to fifteen percent (15%) paid to a third -party advertising agency. If a third -party advertising agency commission exceeds fifteen percent (15%), the amount in excess of fifteen percent (15%) shall not be deducted for purposes of calculating the gross receipts generated or the Public Benefit Contribution. If there is a first and last partial calendar year during the existence of the Project, the amount payable shall be prorated on the basis of a 365 day year.

Equal Quarterly Payments of Public Benefit Contribution shall commence on the date on which 7 •:•

electronic messages are first allowed to appear on the Project. Company shall not conceal advertising revenues derived from the digital displays within the nonnal price range the Company charges for any appurtenances that is installed on the Project.

E. Project Approvals.

This Agreement is conditioned upon Company, and/or its successor's or assigns, obtaining within a period of two (2) years from the date of this Agreement, on such terms and conditions as shall be approved by Company, from all governmental agencies and authorities (including but not limited to the City) all licenses, permits, approvals and consents to design, use, construct, operate, service and maintain the Project on the Property. The City Manager shall have the authority to extend in one or more extensions, the two-year deadline by up to six (6) months.

Company shall, at its own expense and before commencement of demolition, construction or development of any structures or other work of improvement upon the Property, secure or cause to be secured any applicable Project Approvals, Conditional Use Permits and building permits from the City, and any and all permits and approvals which may be required by any other governmental agency or utility affected by such construction, development or work to be performed by Company pursuant to this Agreement. Not by way of limiting the foregoing, in developing and constructing the Project, Company shall comply with all: (1) applicable development standards in the City's Municipal Code, (2) applicable NPDES requirements pertaining to the Project, and (3) applicable building codes, except as may be permitted through approved variances and modifications. Company shall pay all normal and customary fees and charges applicable to such permits, and any fees and charges hereafter imposed by the City in connection with the Project which are standard and uniformly -applied to similar projects in the City. Nothing herein relieves the City from its contractual duty to issue all municipal building permits that are associated with the Project if Company is in compliance with the terms of this Agreement.

F. Dimmers. Company shall install an automatic dimming system to control the intensity of the light emitting from the Project during operations between sunset and sunrise to conform to Applicable Rules, Conditions of Approval, State guidelines, and Federal guidelines.

G. Maintenance of the Property and Project. Company, for itself and its successors and assigns, hereby covenants and agrees to be responsible for the following:
(1) Maintenance and repair of the Project (where authorized pursuant to the Agreement, and including but not limited to, the displays installed thereon, and all related on -site improvements and, if applicable, easements and rights -of -way, at its sole cost and expense), including, without limitation, landscaping, poles, lighting, signs and walls (as they relate to the Project) in good repair, free of graffiti, rubbish, debris and other hazards to persons using the same, and in accordance with all applicable laws, rules, ordinances and regulations of all federal, W
•:

state, and local bodies and agencies having jurisdiction over the Property, unless those federal, state, and local bodies have an exception for a legal nonconforming use. Any graffiti found on the Project shall be removed within three (3) days of notification. Maintenance and repair shall include, but not be limited to, the following: (i) sweeping and trash removal related to the Project; (ii) the care and replacement of all shrubbery, plantings, and other landscaping or the painted backing in a healthy condition if damaged as a result of the Project; (iii) the ongoing maintenance by Company of any access road to the Project if damaged by the Company and to minimize dust caused by the Project; and (iii) the repair, replacement and repainting of the Project's structures and displays as necessary to maintain such outdoor advertising structure in good condition and repair.
(2) Maintenance of the Project and surrounding portions of the Property in such a manner as to avoid the reasonable determination of a duly authorized official of the City that a public nuisance has been created by the absence of adequate maintenance of the Project such as to be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare, or that such a condition of deterioration or disrepair causes appreciable harm or is materially detrimental to property or improvements within three hundred (300) feet of the Property. (3) Company shall reasonably coordinate with any neighboring property owners who share utilities or access roads to their separate respective outdoor advertising structure. The City may designate alternative access for planning purposes so long as such alternative access allows Property to access its outdoor advertising structure and related utilities.

H. Rights to Project. Company shall be entitled to design, use, construct, operate, service, repair, and maintain from time to time the Project with a two -panel changeable message display center on the Property identified in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. The Project, including the message display centers, shall be designed and constructed in accordance with design and plans per scale drawings, approved by the City and identified in Exhibit `B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Said design and plans shall also include maximum height and size standards for the Project.

I. Advertising Limitation. As a material component of the consideration underlying the Agreement, Company voluntarily covenants and agrees for itself, its successors and assigns that during the life of the Project, meaning for as long as the Freeway Oriented Electronic Sign is in place, no advertising displayed on the Project shall contain any advertising for tobacco products of any type, cannabis businesses or products of any type, adult entertainment oriented businesses, sexually oriented messages, or use sexually oriented images or language. Company further agrees that City has the right to object to any other advertising that, in City's sole and absolute discretion, may be considered detrimental to the image of the City. In such cases only, City shall inform Company in writing of the detrimental advertising and request that it be removed immediately.
0 J. Discount Advertising. Company shall offer a ten percent (10%) discount off its applicable rates for display of advertising on the Project to any business that is a member in good standing of the Yucaipa Chamber of Commerce. The Company has the option to refuse advertising from Businesses that are in immediate competition with the existing use on the specific property, any business category prohibited in Section "I", or if in conflict with pre- existing contracts.

K. Relocation. As to the Project approved under this Agreement and after the Project is installed and/or becomes nonconforming, such Project may be relocated by mutual agreement between the Company and the City on whatever terms are agreeable to both parties under the authority of California Business and Professions Code section 5412. "Relocation" as used in this section, includes removal of an advertising structure and construction of a new advertising structure to substitute for the advertising structure removed. The purpose of this section is to allow the City to continue to develop in a planned manner without expenditure of public funds while allowing the continued maintenance of private investment and a medium of public communication established in outdoor advertising L. Timingof f Project. Company shall commence the Project within the time set forth in the Tentative Schedule of Performance, attached hereto as Exhibit "C". "Commencement" of the Project is defined herein as commencement of construction or improvements under the City building permit for the construction of the Project on the Property, which shall occur as soon as possible following Company's receipt of all necessary project approvals and final permits. In the event that Company fails to meet the schedule for Commencement of the Project, then after compliance with Section 10, the City may terminate this Agreement by delivering written notice to the Company, and, in the event of such termination, neither Party shall have any further obligation hereunder. However, if circumstances within the scope of Section 13.P delay the commencement or completion of the Project, then such delays shall not constitute grounds for any termination rights found within this Agreement. In such case, the timeline to commence or complete the relevant task shall be extended in the manner set forth at Section 13.P.

Notwithstanding the above, Company shall, at all times, comply with all other obligations set forth in this Agreement regarding the construction or improvement of the Project.

L. Conditions of Approval. Company shall comply with the additional conditions of approvals, attached hereto as Exhibit "D".

M. Permanent Removal of Existing Billboard
(1). Penmanent Removal of Existing Billboard. In consideration of City's agreement to allow development of the Project as provided for in this Agreement, Company agrees to cause the permanent removal of an existing billboard within the City that is acceptable to the City (the "Existing Billboard"), and provide proof of that removal in a manner and method that are acceptable to the City Attorney. Removal of the Existing Billboard shall be in accordance with 10 •:l

all applicable federal, state and local regulations. Company shall ensure that all required permits necessary to remove the Existing Billboard are secured, including but not limited to, City demolition permits.
(2). Timing of Removal. Company shall cause the permanent removal of the Existing Billboard referenced in this Section 6 within sixty (60) days of all permits necessary for the Project. The sixty (60) day period for removing the Existing Billboard shall commence upon the later of. (1) the expiration of all administrative appeal periods provided by the City Development Code and applicable to City approval of the Project; or (2) if an appeal is filed, the date upon which either the Planning Commission and/or City Council approval becomes final; and (3) if a judicial action is filed challenging the City's action in regards to the Project, the date upon which any superior court action or district court action becomes final. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Company shall not be entitled to commence construction and installation of the Project prior to the removal of the Existing Billboard.

7. City Obligations and Entitlements.

A. City Logo on Project. Company agrees to place the City Logo on the Project substantially as shown in the scale drawings in Exhibit `B", and in accordance with specifications provided by the City. Such logo shall measure per scale drawings identified in Exhibit `B" and shall be maintained at all times by Company as part of its customary maintenance of the Project.

B. Cily Cooperation. City agrees, to the extent legally capable, at no expense or liability to City, to cooperate with Company in obtaining all necessary licenses, permits, approvals and consents to enable Company to design, construct, operate, use and maintain the Freeway Oriented Electronic Billboards. In this regard, if requested by Company, and to the extent City is legally capable, City agrees to join in and cooperate with in -kind assistance with Company in processing future applications to Caltrans and/or other governmental agencies to aid and facilitate obtaining said approvals and the necessary electrical installation, provided that the City shall have no obligation to expend public funds in furtherance of Company's permits or approvals.

C. Promotion of City Events and Public Service Announcements. As further consideration for City's Agreement to allow Company to develop the Freeway Oriented Electronic Billboards, City shall be entitled to place public service announcements on the Message Display Center, provided, however, that such public service announcements shall be limited to civic public service messages, including those sponsored by private organizations as approved by the City (hereinafter "Public Service Messages"). The terin Public Service Message shall expressly exclude any message advertising any business, company or event where such message would have a direct and tangible economic benefit to a private, for -profit company, except that the City may choose to promote City sponsored or coordinated events and 11 -690-

performances at the Yucaipa Performing Arts Center (YPAC). City shall be entitled to post up to one eight (8) second Public Service Message per minute on each Billboard on a continuous basis. The City has the sole authority to determine the number of concurrent Public Service Messages posted, the frequency that each Public Service Message will be posted during any given timefraime, and the length of time (e.g. the number of days) that the Public Service Message will remain in rotation. Notwithstanding the foregoing, should City not utilize its allotment of advertising space, Company shall be entitled to lease that time for other advertising purposes consistent with section 9 below. For all Public Service Messages, City shall be responsible for providing Company with the advertising copy and artwork. Company shall not be responsible for producing or substantially modifying any advertising copy for a Public Service Message, and shall display the Public Service Message within 3 days after receipt and approval of the Public Service Message copy. Company shall review and approve Public Service Message copy in a timely manner, and not more than two business days after submittal by the City. Company's review for approval shall be related to the ability to display the Public Service Message copy, and Company shall have no authority to reject a Public Service Message based on its content. Company's obligation to provide and display Public Service Messages shall survive termination of this Agreement and shall remain in full force and effect until removal of the Freeway Oriented Electronic Billboard from the Property.

In addition, (i) Company shall provide use of the advertising space on the Message Display Center, as reasonably necessary and available for emergency broadcasts, Amber Alerts and Wanted Criminal Posting from City's Police Department and (ii) Company and City will work cooperatively and in good faith for City to place additional any Public Service Message, both on a space availability basis on the advertising space of the Project.

Company shall prepare and submit an annual report no later than February 1 st of each year reporting on the Company's posting of Public Service Messages and providing a list of the messages posted during the prior calendar year, and the period in which each message was featured on the Project.

D. Program to Promote Local Businesses. As further consideration for City's Agreement to allow Company to develop the Freeway Oriented Electronic Billboard, and in addition to the provisions of the foregoing paragraph C, Company shall implement a Local Business Promotion Program that provides one free eight (8) second advertisement per minute on each Billboard to highlight one business located and operating in the City of Yucaipa.

Company shall post the advertisement for each business for a period of no less than one (1) week, and no more than three (3) weeks. City shall coordinate local business participation in the Local Business Promotion Program, and will be responsible for providing to Company the information regarding each participating business, including the message content and timefraime for each display.

No businesses listed in paragraph 6. I. above shall be entitled to participate in the program. 12 -691-

Company's obligation to provide and display Public Service Messages shall survive termination of this Agreement and shall remain in full force and effect until removal of the Freeway Oriented Electronic Billboard from the Property.

E. Annual Review. The City Council shall have the right to review this Agreement annually at the Company's sole cost, on or before the anniversary of the commencement of the Effective Date, to ascertain the good faith compliance by Company with the terms of this Agreement ("Annual Review"). However, no failure on the part of the City to conduct or complete an Annual Review as provided herein shall have any impact on the validity of this Agreement. Company shall cooperate with the City in the conduct of any such Annual Review.

F. Special Review. The City Council may, in its sole and absolute discretion, order a special review of compliance with this Agreement at any time at the Company's sole cost ("Special Review"). Company shall cooperate with the City in the conduct of such any Special Review.

G. City Rights of Access. The City and its officers, employees, agents and contractors shall have the right, at their sole risk and expense, to enter the Property without interfering with any railroad or other right-of-way, and at all reasonable times with as little interference as possible, for the purpose of conducting any Annual Review or Special Review, inspection, construction, reconstruction, relocation, maintenance, repair or service of any public improvements or public facilities located on the Property, or to perform any rights of the City as provided in this Agreement. Any damage or injury to the Property or to the improvements constructed thereon resulting from such entry shall be promptly repaired at the sole expense of the City. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, in no event will the City's representatives ever climb up the pole of the Project during any inspection.

H. Other Rights of the City. In the event of any violation or threatened violation of any of the provisions of this Agreement, then in addition to, but not in lieu of, any of the rights or remedies the City may have to enforce the provisions of the Agreement, the City shall have the right, after complying with Section 10 of the Agreement, to withhold or revoke until compliance by the Company, after giving written notice of said violation, any building permits, occupancy permits, certificates of occupancy, business licenses and similar matters or approvals pertaining to the Project or any part thereof or interests therein as to the violating person or one threatening violation.

I. No City Liability. The granting of a right of enforcement to the City does not create a mandatory duty on the part of the City to enforce any provision of the Agreement. The failure of the City to enforce the Agreement shall not give rise to a cause of action on the part of any person. No officer or employee of the City shall be personally liable to Company, its successors, transferees or assigns, for any default or breach by the City under the Agreement.

8. Records, Maintenance of Records, and Inspection of Records. 13 I

A. During the life of the Project and for five (5) years after cessation of use of the Project, Company shall keep and maintain accounting records for all gross receipts generated in connection with advertising by the Project. Company shall keep and maintain said records for five (5) years. After providing Company with prior reasonable notice of no fewer than five (5) Business Days, City shall have the right to inspect and photocopy during normal business hours Company accounting records supporting the gross receipts generated by the Project. Following such inspection, if City disputes the amount of costs set forth, City and Company shall mutually select a certified public accountant to audit the Company accounting records and render a certification as to the final gross receipts in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. If such certification proves that the gross receipts were understated by more than five percent (5%), then the cost of the accountant and the certification shall be paid by Company. If such certification reveals that an adjustment is necessary, the appropriate payments in connection therewith shall be promptly made following the date of such certification.

B. Company shall prepare and submit an annual report no later than February I st of each year reporting on the Local Business Promotion Program, as set forth in paragraph 7. D. above, and providing a list of the business participants in the Program during the prior calendar year, and the period in which each business was featured on the Project.

9. Indemnification; Tolling.

A. Company agrees to and shall indemnify, hold harmless, and defend, the City and its respective officers, officials, members, agents, employees, and representatives, from liability or claims for death or personal injury and claims for property damage which may arise from the acts, errors, and/or omissions of Company or its contractors, subcontractors, agents, employees or other persons acting on its behalf in relation to the Project and/or in any manner arising from this Agreement, the Project, or any operations of the Project. The foregoing indemnity applies to all deaths, injuries, and damages, and claims therefor, suffered or alleged to have been suffered by reason of the acts, errors, and/or omissions referred to in this Section, regardless of whether or not the City prepared, supplied, or approved plans or specifications, or both. In the event of litigation, the City agrees, at no cost to the City, to cooperate with Company. This indemnification, hold harmless and defense requirement shall survive the termination or expiration of this Agreement. The City reserves the right, in cases subject to this indemnity, to reasonably approve the attorney selected by Company to defend Company and the City in any such action.

B. In the event of any court action or proceeding challenging the validity of this Agreement or any of the Conditions of Approvals for the Project, Company shall defend, at its own expense, the action or proceeding. In addition, Company shall reimburse the City for the City's costs in defending any court action or proceeding challenging the validity of this Agreement or any of the Conditions of Approvals and Company shall also pay any award of costs, expenses and fees that the court having jurisdiction over such challenge makes in favor of 14 -693-

any challenger and against the City. Company shall cooperate with the City in any such defense as the City may reasonably request and may not resolve such challenge without the agreement of the City. In the event Company fails or refuses to reimburse the City for its cost to defend any challenge to this Agreement or the Conditions of Approvals, the City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement, subject to the notice and cure requirements of Section 10. In all events, the City shall have the right to resolve any challenge in any manner, in its sole discretion, provided, however, Company's consent shall be required if the resolution of the challenge shall require a payment by Company or limit Company's rights under this Agreement. Additionally, in the event of any litigation or referendum initiated by third parties to attack, set aside, modify, void or annul this Agreement or any of the Conditions of Approvals (a "Challenge"), the term of this Agreement shall be tolled for the period during which such Challenge is proceeding until fully and finally resolved.

In order to ensure compliance with this Section, within twenty (20) days after notification by the City of the filing of any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void or annul this Agreement or any of the Conditionals of Approvals, Company shall deposit with the City cash or other security in the amount of fifty thousand dollars ($50,000), satisfactory in form to the City Attorney, guaranteeing indemnification or reimbursement to the City of all costs related to any action triggering the obligations of this Section. If the City is required to draw on that cash or security to indemnify or reimburse itself for such costs, Company shall restore the deposit to its original amount within fifteen (15) days after notice from the City. Additionally, if at any time the City Attorney determines that an additional deposit or additional security up to an additional fifty thousand dollars ($50,000.00) is necessary to secure the obligations of this section, Company shall provide such additional security within fifteen (15) days of notice from the City Attorney.— The City shall promptly notify Company of any claim, action or proceeding within the scope of this Section and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of any such claim or action. Company's consent shall be required for any resolution.

10. Default Remedies. Failure by City or Company to perform any term or provision of this Agreement for a period of thirty (30) days from the verified receipt of written notice thereof from the other shall constitute a default under this Agreement, subject to extensions of time by mutual consent in writing. Said notice shall specify in detail the nature of the alleged default and the manner in which said default may be satisfactorily cured. If the nature of the alleged default is such that it cannot reasonably be cured within such thirty (30) day period, the commencement of the cure within such time period and the diligent prosecution to completion of the cure shall be deemed a cure within such period.

Subject to the foregoing, after notice and expiration of the thirty (30) day period without cure, the notifying party, at its option, shall have all rights and remedies provided by law and/or may give notice of intent to terminate this Agreement pursuant to Government Code Section 65868 and the City Development Agreement Regulations. Following such notice of intent to terminate, the matter shall be scheduled for consideration and review by the City Council within thirty (30) 15 IMOT

calendar days in the manner set forth in Government Code Sections 65867 and 65868 and the City Development Agreement Regulations. Following consideration of the evidence presented in said review before the City Council and a determination that a default exists, the Party alleging the default by the other Parry may give written notice of tennination of this Agreement to the other Party. Upon any such termination, the respective rights, duties and obligations of the Parties hereto shall without further action cease as of the date of such termination (except as to duties and obligations that arose prior to the date of such termination). In no event shall monetary damages of any kind be available against the City for any alleged default or breach by the City, and Company's sole remedy shall be specific perfonmance.

11. Termination and Expiration. Unless otherwise stated herein, upon the expiration of the tenn or termination of this Agreement, the vested rights provided by this Agreement shall terminate and be of no further force or effect. However, such expiration or termination shall not affect Company's obligations under Section 6 and 7, nor the obligation to pay any claim of any Party hereto arising out of the provisions of this Agreement prior to the effective date of such termination provided that a Building Permit has been issued for any portion of the Project. After a Building Permit has been issued for any portion of the Project, the obligations under Sections 6 and 9, and the obligation to pay any claim arising before the effective date of expiration or termination shall survive, and continue after termination or expiration for the life of the Project.

12. Institution of Legal Actions. In the event that the Company fails to cure or correct any Default, the City may (i) terminate this Agreement, (ii) institute an action at law or equity against the Company to seek specific performance of the terms of this Agreement, or to cure, correct, or remedy any Default, to recover damages for any Default, to recover the specified amounts due for failure to comply with the terms of this Agreement, or to obtain any other remedy consistent with the purpose of this Agreement.

13. General Provisions.

A. Interest in Property. The City, and Company acknowledge and agree that Company is the tenant or licensee of the Property and thus is qualified to enter into and be a Party to this Agreement under the Development Agreement Law. The Company acknowledges and agrees that Company has a legal or equitable interest in the Property and thus is qualified to enter into and be a party to this Agreement under the Development Agreement Law.

Additionally, prior to the execution of this Agreement, Company has allowed the City to view, but not retain, a redacted copy of the applicable lease which demonstrates that Company has a leasehold or license interest in the Property, which interest shall be maintained until removal of the Freeway Oriented Electronic Billboard from the Property.

B. Transfer of Interests in Property of Agreement. In the event of a proposed transfer of interest in the Property or in this Agreement by Company to a transferee, Company agrees to 16 IMO M

provide the City at least thirty (30) days written notice of such proposed transfer and shall provide satisfactory evidence that the transferee will assume in writing through an assignment and assumption agreement all remaining obligations of Company under this Agreement. The assignment and assumption agreement shall be in a form reasonably satisfactory to the City Attorney. However, Company has no obligation to obtain the consent of the City to assign this Agreement to a transferee. Notwithstanding the foregoing: (i) the terms, covenants and conditions of this Agreement shall be binding upon any transferee whether or not such an assignment and assumption agreement is signed by the assignee upon acquiring the Property or Project; and (ii) no such transfer shall relieve Company (transferor) of any obligations under this Agreement unless: (A) at least thirty (30) days before any transfer, Company has submitted to City the name of the proposed transferee and financial information regarding the transferee reasonably satisfactory to the City's City Manager, and the City determines, prior to transfer, that the proposed transferee is able to satisfactorily fulfill the obligations of this Agreement, and (B) the transferee accepts, in writing, the obligations of Company under this Agreement. Such writing shall be in form and content reasonably satisfactory to the City Attorney.

C. Waiver. The failure of either Party hereto to insist in any one or more instances upon the strict performance of any of the covenants, agreements, terns, provisions or conditions of this Agreement, or to exercise any election or option herein contained, shall not be construed as a waiver or relinquishment for the future of such covenant, agreement, term, provision, condition, election or option, but the same shall continue and remain in full force and effect. No waiver by any Party hereto of any covenant, agreement, term, provision or condition of this Agreement shall be deemed to have been made unless expressed in writing and signed by an appropriate official or officer on behalf of such Party.

D. BindingEffect. ffect. All of the provisions, agreements, rights, powers, standards, terms, covenants and obligations contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon the Parties and their respective heirs, successors (by merger, reorganization, consolidation or otherwise) and assigns, devisees, administrators, representatives, lessees, and all other persons acquiring the Property or Project, or any portion thereof, or any interest therein, whether by operation of law or in any manner whatsoever, and shall inure to the benefit of the parties and their respective heirs, successors and assigns.

E. Relationship of Parties. The Parties acknowledge and agree that Company is not acting as an agent, joint venturer or partner of the City, but each is, in fact, an independent contractual party and not in any way under the control or direction of the City except as is expressly provided to the contrary in this Agreement.

F. Recordation. As provided in Government Code Section 65868.5, the City Clerk shall record a copy of this Agreement with the Registrar -Recorder of the County of San Bernardino within ten (10) days following its execution by both Parties. Company shall reimburse the City for recording costs, if any.
17 -696-

G. No Third Party Beneficiaries. The only signatories to this Agreement are the City and Company. There are no third party beneficiaries and this Agreement is not intended and shall not be construed to benefit or be enforceable by any other person whatsoever other than the successors in interest of the signatories.

H. Advice; Neutral Interpretation. Each Party has received independent legal advice from its attorneys with respect to the advisability of executing this Agreement and the meaning of the provisions hereof. This Agreement has been drafted through a joint effort of the Parties and their counsel and therefore shall not be construed against either of the Parties in its capacity as draftsperson, but in accordance with its fair meaning.

I. Consideration. The City and Company acknowledge and agree that there is good, sufficient and valuable consideration flowing to the City and to Company pursuant to this Agreement as more particularly set forth in the Recitals and Section 2 of this Agreement. The Parties further acknowledge and agree that the exchanged consideration hereunder is fair, just and reasonable.

Notices. All notices, disclosures, demands, acknowledgments, statements, requests, responses and other communications (each, a "Communication") required or permitted to be given hereunder shall be in writing, signed by a signatory hereto (or an officer, agent or attorney of such party) giving such Communication, and shall be deemed effective (i) upon receipt if hand delivered or sent by overnight courier service; or (ii) upon delivery or the date of refusal if sent by the United States snail, postage prepaid, certified mail, return receipt requested, in either case addressed as follows:

If to Company:

General Outdoor Advertising
632 S. Hope Ave.

Ontario, CA 91761
With a Copy to:

If to City:

City of Yucaipa
Attn: City Manager
34292 Yucaipa Blvd.

Yucaipa, CA 92399
With a Copy to:

City of Yucaipa
Attn: City Attorney
350 South Grand Avenue,
37th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
K. Authority to Enter Agreement. All Parties have the requisite power and Im
-697-

authority to execute, deliver and perform the Agreement. All Parties warrant that the individuals who have signed the Agreement have the legal power, right, and authority to snake this Agreement and bind each respective Party.

L. Amendment/Modification. This Agreement may be amended from time to time, in whole or in part, by mutual written consent of the Parties or their successors in interest, as follows: City and Company, by inutual agreement, may terminate or amend the terms of this Agreement, and the amendment or termination shall be accomplished in the manner provided under the Development Agreement Act and the City Development Agreement Regulations for the enactment of Development Agreement amendments.

M. Future Litigation Expenses.
(i) Payment of Prevailing Party. If the City or Company brings an action or proceeding (including, without limitation, any motion, order to show cause, cross -complaint, counterclaim, third -party claim or arbitration proceeding) by reason of default, breach, tortious act, or act or omission, arising out of this Agreement, the prevailing party in such action or proceeding shall be entitled to its costs and expenses of suit including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys' fees and expert witness fees.
(ii) Scope of Fees. Attorneys' fees under this Section shall include attorneys' fees on any appeal and, in addition, a party entitled to attorneys' fees shall be entitled to all other reasonable costs and expenses incurred in connection with such action. In addition to the foregoing award of attorneys' fees to the prevailing party, the prevailing party in any lawsuit shall be entitled to its attorneys' fees incurred in any post judgment proceedings to collect or enforce the judgment. This provision is separate and several and shall survive the merger of this Agreement into any judgment on this Agreement.

N. Headings. The section headings used in this Agreement are for convenient reference only and shall not be used in construing this Agreement. The words "include," "including" or other words of like import are intended as words of illustration and not limitation and shall be construed to mean "including, without limitation." O. Alterations. No alteration, amendment or modification of this Agreement shall be valid unless evidenced by a written instrument executed by the Parties hereto with the same formality as this Agreement, and made in the manner required by the Development Agreement Act.

P. Severability. If any article, section, subsection, term or provision of this Agreement, or the application thereof to any party or circumstance, shall, to any extent, be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of the article, section, subsection, term or provision of 19 IMO

this Agreement, or the application of the same to parties or circumstances other than those to which it is held invalid or unenforceable, shall not be affected thereby, and each remaining article, section, subsection, term or provision of this Agreement shall be valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law.

Q. Force Majeure. Performance by any Parry of its obligations hereunder (other than for payment of money) shall be excused during any period of "Permitted Delay," which Permitted Delay shall mean and include delay caused by an event beyond the reasonable control of the Party claiming the delay (and despite the good faith efforts of such Party) that prevents the Party from fulfilling the obligations for which it seeks excuse including without limitation all of the following to the extent that they prevent the Party claiming delay from fulfilling the obligation from which it seeks to be excused: acts of God; civil commotion; riots; strikes; picketing or other labor disputes; shortages of materials or supplies; damage to work in progress by reason of fire, floods, earthquake or other casualties; failure, delay or inability of the other Party to act; terrorism, and litigation brought by a third party attacking the validity of this Agreement or the Conditions of Approval. If any such events shall occur before the removal of the Freeway Oriented Electronic Billboard from the Property, then the time for performance shall be extended for the duration of each such event, provided that the Tenn of this Agreement shall not be extended under any circumstances for more than five (5) years beyond the date it would have otherwise expired.

R. Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be governed in all respects by the laws of the State of California.

S. Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence of each and every provision of this Agreement or performance hereunder.

T. Entire Agreement. This Agreement embodies the entire Agreement between the Parties and supersedes any prior or contemporaneous understandings or written or oral agreements between the Parties hereto related to the Agreement.

U. Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original but all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.

V. Compliance With Law. Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement, the Parties agree to comply with all federal, state and local laws and to act in good faith and reasonably in carrying out the terms of this Agreement. 20 1MO M

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the 27t1i day of June, 2022.

ATTEST:

By:

City Clerk
(SEAL)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

City Attorney
"CITY"

CITY OF YUCAIPA
Lo
Mayor
"COMPANY"

GENERAL OUTDOOR ADVERTISING
IM
Its:
21 -700-

EXHIBIT "A"

PROPERTY
(Legal Description)
22 -701-

EXHIBIT `B"

DESIGN AND PLANS

PER SCALE DRAWINGS
23 -702-

EXHIBIT "C"

TENTATIVE, NON BINDING SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE

ITEM OF PERFORMANCE

TIME FOR PERFORMANCE

1. City's Planning Commission holds public
May 18, 2022
hearing and recommends approval of
Agreement and Conditions of Approval

2. City's City Council holds hearings to
June 27, 2022 (1St Reading); July 11, 2022
approve Agreement and first and second
(2°d Reading), provided Company has
reading of Ordinance
fully executed the Agreement

3. Effective Date of this Agreement.
30 days following City Council's second
reading of Ordinance, or August 10, 2022

4. Company prepares and submits to City
Within 120 days of the Council's second
working drawings specifications and
reading of the Ordinance approving this
engineering, the City commences
Agreement
approval process.

5. City to approve all construction and
Within 30 days of City's receipt of
engineering drawings and specifications
Company's construction drawings and
with a plan check approval, and issue a
specifications addressing all of City's
building permit and an electrical permit.
comments.

City agrees to any necessary building or
electrical permits needed.

6. 7.

Company to submit proof of insurance to
Prior to commencing any inspections and
Cit
work on the Project

8. Company pays City Public Benefit
Contribution
It is understood that this Tentative Schedule of Performance is subject to all of the terms and conditions of the text of the Agreement. The summary of the items of performance in this Schedule of Performance is not intended to supersede or modify the more complete description 24 -703-

in the text; in the event of any conflict or inconsistency between this Tentative Schedule of Performance and the text of the Agreement, the text of the Agreement shall govern.

The time periods set forth in this Tentative Schedule of Performance may be altered or amended only by written agreement signed by both Company and the City. Notwithstanding any extension of the Term in the manner described in, and subject to the provisions of Section 6.E. of the Agreement, the City Manager shall have the authority to approve extensions of time set forth in this Tentative Schedule of Perfonnance without action of the City Council. 25 -704-

EXHIBIT "D"

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
The following additional conditions shall apply to the installation of the Project and shall conform to all applicable provisions of the project approvals and the following conditions, in a manner subject to the approval of the Director of Development Services or his or her designee:
(1) Company shall install the Project in accordance with the terms of this Agreement and approved project plans. Before the issuance of final inspection of the final pennits, Company shall underground all utilities necessary for the digital displays and the Property shall be maintained in accordance with this Agreement.
(2) A building permit will be required, and structural calculations shall be prepared by a licensed civil engineer and approved by the City Building Official. (3) The Project shall be located in the portion of the Property shown on Exhibit `B" and shall be of the dimensions per approved plans.
(4) The size of the display of the Project shall not exceed the dimensions set forth in Ordinance No. 393, and shall not to exceed the maximum height set forth in that Ordinance, including all extensions, and shall be spaced at intervals from any other outdoor advertising structure on the same side of the freeway and measured parallel to the freeway as set forth in that Ordinance and depicted in Exhibit `B" approved by the City as part of the Project approvals. (5) The Project pole shall have a column cover as depicted in Exhibit `B". (6) Plans and specifications for the proposed installation of the Project shall be submitted to the City Development Services and Building Departments for plan check and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. Plans and specifications for the proposed installation of the undergrounding of all utilities, shall be submitted to the City Development Services and Building Departments for plan check and approval prior to the issuance of electrical permits.
(7) Prior to the approval of the final inspection, all applicable conditions of approval and all mandatory improvements shall be completed to the reasonable satisfaction of the City. (8) Company shall maintain the Project and use thereof in full compliance with all applicable codes, standards, policies and regulations imposed by the City, county, state or federal agencies by any duly and valid City, county or state ordinance with jurisdiction over the facilities, unless the Project is exempted as a legal nonconforming use, including but not limited to the California Outdoor Advertising Act commencing with Bus. & Prof. Code, Section 5200 et. seq. and the Federal Highway Beautification Act.

FM
-705-

(9) Company shall, at all times, comply with the approval for the Project from the California Department of Transportation Outdoor Advertising Division, and shall maintain acceptable clearance between proposed outdoor advertising structure and Southern California Edison distribution lines.
(10) Company shall pay any and all applicable fees due to any public agency prior to the final issuance of the applicable building or electrical pen -nits. (11) The activities proposed in the Agreement shall be conducted completely upon the Project and shall not use or encroach on any public right-of-way. (12) Company shall ensure that all access to the Project is kept restricted to the general public to the extent permitted under local laws and by the project approvals. (13) If any portion of the landscaping or painted backing installed adjacent to the Project is damaged by the Company or becomes damaged, unhealthy or otherwise in need of replacement, as determined by the City's Director of Development Services or his or her designee, Company shall ensure that the replacement is accomplished within fourteen (14) days of notification by the City, unless such time is extended by the City's Director of Development Services or his or her designee if Company shows unusual circumstances requiring more time to accomplish such replacement. Company or the owner of the property may trim any landscaping so as not to block the Project or with the reasonable consent of the Director of Development Services, the Company at the Company's own cost, can remove or relocate any landscaping. (14) Company shall be required to install all utilities underground in connection with the Project in conformance with Ordinance 393. Company shall coordinate its work with the requirements of Southern California Edison to achieve the undergrounding of all utilities. (15) Company shall comply with all necessary federal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements pertaining to the proposed use, to the extent applicable.
(16) All graffiti shall be adequately and completely removed or painted over within two (2) days of notice to Company of such graffiti being affixed on the Project. (17) Prior to final sign off of the building permit for the Project, the applicable landscaping or painted backing shall be installed at the Property (18) Company shall comply with State law regarding the limitation of light or glare or such other standards as adopted by the Outdoor Advertising Association of America, Inc. (OAAA), including but not limited to, the 0.3 foot-candles limitation over ambient light levels and ensuring additional flexibility in reducing such maximum light level standard given the lighting environment, the obligation to have automatic diming capabilities, as well as providing the City's Director of Development Services or his or her designee with a designated Company 27 -706-

employee phone number and/or email address for emergencies or complaints that will be monitored 24 hours a day/7 days per week. Upon any reasonable complaint by the City's Director of Development Services or his or her designee, Company shall dim the display to meet these guidelines -and further perform a brightness measurement of the display using OAAA standards and provide the City with the results of same within 5 days of the City's complaint.

It is understood that these "Conditions of Approval" are subject to all of the terms and conditions of the text of the Agreement. The summary of the items of performance in this these "Conditions of Approval" is not intended to supersede or modify the more complete description in the text; in the event of any conflict or inconsistency between these "Conditions of Approval" and the text of the Agreement, the text of the Agreement shall govern. In addition, project -related Conditions of Approval associated with the land use entitlement are incorporated by reference. 28 -707-

Yucaipa City CouncilJune 27, 2022

Yucaipa City Council
June 27, 2022