EYESORE?: Del Cerro residents have filed a complaint with the California Attorney General’s office about the SDSU freeway sign. Residents say the sign is too bright and SDSU did not file proper documents to build it.Council questions legalityof billboard, files complaint with state attorney
By Vince DiCanzio
Contributor
On-campus debate over San Diego State University’s electronic billboard near Interstate 8 may have calmed since last semester, but one local community group’s opposition is growing.
The Del Cerro Action Council, an organization of residents who live north of Interstate 8 and east of College Avenue, claims the sign is in violation of state and local ordinances.
Councilmember and Del Cerro resident Tom Martin has been the most vocal of the council’s protest of the sign.
“We’re trying to preserve our neighborhood,” Martin said. “The sign detracts from the university’s image substantially and is contrary to the California Outdoor Advertising Act.”
According to Martin, Section 5350 of the Act requires a permit for “any advertising display ... without first having secured a written permit from the Director (of Transportation of the State of California) or from his authorized agent.”
He said that SDSU’s sign does not qualify as an on-premises sign, and therefore, is in violation of the current state regulations.
Joe Vasquez, associate vice president of business enterprises at SDSU, said the university is not in violation.
“We don’t do advertising (on the sign),” Vasquez said. “We try to make it more of a community bulletin billboard.”
Earlier this month, Martin sent a letter of complaint to the state Attorney General’s Office in Sacramento stating the alleged violations.
“It looks like some kind of Las Vegas casino or a car lot. It’s shameful for that fine school,” Martin said, adding that his wife and daughter are SDSU graduates.
But the sign’s appearance is not the only aspect he is against. Martin opposes the fact that SDSU did not do an environmental impact report.
“The sign is so large and it has such an impact on the area, that an environmental impact report should have been done,” Martin said. “The sign is pretty bright and it shines up the canyon into people’s bedrooms. It’s disturbing to some of the folks here.”
Martin said the university told him they did not need a permit for the sign. SDSU Facilities and Transportation Planner Larry Piper said the university was told by CalTrans, the state’s department of transportation, that a permit was not required for the sign.
“The sign is on state property, so we were not required to go through city sign ordinances,” Piper said. “The sign is strictly for campus activities and campus-related events and is considered an on-premises sign.”
Piper said that CalTrans specifications don’t require permits for on-premises signs, and the sign was part of a signage package that came with the construction of Cox Arena.
“Signage is seldom a project by itself,” Piper said. “It was part of a larger project.”
Piper said the arena had a very extensive environmental impact report done. The sign was not seen as a separate project.
“You don’t do an environmental impact report for separate signs,” he said.
The College Area Community Council’s former President, Paul Thomas, said the council is not currently protesting the sign and no official stand has ever been taken by the CACC.
“My only complaint was the sign was very bright initially,” Thomas said. “However, the university did decrease the brightness of the sign. It took a little getting used to, but now it’s no problem.”
Piper said the university has received a lot of positive comments about the sign.
“People recognize it’s a good way to reach the community,” he said. “It’s been somewhat of a community service because it advertises public events. People don’t just drive by the campus and wonder what’s happening on campus - it puts SDSU more on the map.”
Piper said the university has been working with Martin and the Del Cerro Action Council on the matter.
“We’ve talked with him and tried to do everything we can,” Vasquez said. “but he’s welcome to his opinion.”
Martin said he expects a formal response from the Attorney General’s office within a few weeks.
Be the first to comment on this article!