Stop The Billboard Scam!

[Dog Walker]

There are a lot of little billboards along streets like Beaver St. and St. Augustine Road close to town that are not being rented because the traffic counts are low.  Swapping two of those for an electronic billboard along JTB or Baymeadows is a big revenue gain for Clear Channel.

This bill was written by Clear Channel's lawyers.  You can bet it is not a win-win rather a win for Clear Channel and a loss for us.

[Dog Walker]

Also, what's wrong with the digital billboards? Do people really consider them worse than the old ones they've been replacing?

Haven't cities or states enacted legislation that limits how often the image can change or "flash" based on the fact that it is a distraction to drivers?

And as a follow up to Lakes question, what is the difference between a visual picture advertising the beaches on I-95 and a digital screen telling me to "Look Twice, Save a Life" or "Click It or Ticket"? Aren't they both attracting/distracting at the same rate?

They are allowed to change every eight seconds!  Distracting indeed.  They are not allowed to have moving images, thank heavens!  Because they can change so often, it is cheap and easy for Clear Channel to be "a contributor to the community" by putting up public service messages occasionally.

Can't wait until someone figures out how to hack the satellite feed to the electronic billboards and start inserting porn pictures into the rotation of images.  That would back traffic up for sure.   

[Charles Hunter]

One objection to digital boards is their brightness, they are orders of magnitude brighter than standard boards. Out in the country, that may be OK, but in close proximity to homes, it is not OK.
No, there would be no revenue stream to DOT as they would not be on DOT property.

[thelakelander]

^So is the answer for the opposition to offer up some modifications to the current bill on the issues they disagree with?

[Charles Hunter]

There is no pressing need to pass this bill by the end of August (current schedule).  If the bill could be deferred to allow time for citizens to speak and offer alternatives, that would be good.  You can bet the billboard lobbyists are meeting with Council members. If the bill cannot be deferred, it must be defeated.  Then, perhaps, someone can come with something better for all, and not just better for the billboard companies.

[billnjax]

Haw can people possibly take time to read the billboards when they are all so busy texting, gesturing with both hands while talking on the phone or otherwise occupied when they should be paying attention to their driving. 

[Ocklawaha]

There is no pressing need to pass this bill by the end of August (current schedule).  If the bill could be deferred to allow time for citizens to speak and offer alternatives, that would be good.  You can bet the billboard lobbyists are meeting with Council members. If the bill cannot be deferred, it must be defeated.  Then, perhaps, someone can come with something better for all, and not just better for the billboard companies.

Correction... 'Billboard lobbyists are meeting with Councilman Clark..." You'll recall that the citizens are just NOISE!

I will say that I believe billboards serve a purpose beyond jobs and corporate gain, when traveling long-distances it's often the billboard that alerts one to unknown attractions, restaurants, hotels etc... Maybe I'm just a sucker for "See the 20 foot long alligator," but out near the city limits, perhaps a advertising zone would be useful. Otherwise, the citizens voted NO on billboards, thus any city council member that supports such a city wide bill, should be put on notice that they'll be subject to a class action and recall.

[GatorNation]

^So is the answer for the opposition to offer up some modifications to the current bill on the issues they disagree with?

That would seem logical.    I had a chance to review the legislation in more detail this weekend.  I'm not interested in debating the rhetoric of "billboards are visual pollution" or "billboards are the greatest thing since sliced bread."  Instead, I'd like to focus on the actual language in the legislation. In my opinion, the focus of the debate here should be (a) what type of development standards does the legislation propose, and (b) what zoning regulations does the community-at-large think are reasonable for this industry?  I think this latter issue (what standards are reasonable) is what lakelander is throwing out for discussion.  So let's take a look at the first issue:  What standards does the legislation propose?

The legislation is more than 20 pages long, so I'll do my best to summarize what I read:

1. The legislation creates rules for maintaining and repairing existing "off-site commercial signs."  It revises the Zoning Code to provide that those signs that exist today will be deemed legal nonconforming uses and shall be entitled to be maintained and repaired.  It then states that you are not allowed to change the height, size or type of construction of the sign.  You are only allowed to maintain and repair what you have.

2. The legislation creates a new section in the Zoning Code that allows for "replacement off-site commercial signs in certain zoning districts when existing off-site sign inventory is further reduced, subject to certain performances standards and residential proximity restrictions."  This new section states that it is designed to "encourage the removal of additional off-site commercial signs" and it does so by creating a "sign removal credit system."  A billboard company can earn one credit for each square foot of sign display face removed, and they can apply for a "replacement off-site commercial sign" when they submit "credits equal to twice the display area square footage" of the proposed replacement sign.  Basically, to erect a replacement billboard, you have to take down 2 billboards of equal size.

This new section then creates various zoning and performance standards.  If a billboard company takes down enough signs to erect a replacement sign, that replacement sign can only be built in commercial zoning districts, downtown, industrial zoning districts, public buildings and facilities zoning districts, and certain PUD zoning districts

The bill then prohibits replacement signs in certain historic districts and zoning overlay districts, establishes spacing standards (can't be closer than 1,000 feet to another billboard on non-interstate roads, and 1500 feet for interstates), establishes separation requirements (can't be within 200 feet of residential zoning district), establishes size (672 square feet) and height limits (65 feet)

3. The legislation amends the Charter to "halt the proliferation of off-site commercial billboards by capping the existing inventory of off-site commercial billboards and only permitting replacement off-site commercial billboards when existing inventory is further reduced."  This section of the legislation basically mirrors number 2, above, by stating (a) no person can construct a billboard if doing so would increase the total number of billboards in the City; and (b) you can only construct a replacement billboard if you take down 2 existing ones.

So that answers the first question (what type of development standards does the legislation propose), and the second one remains: what zoning regulations does the community-at-large think are reasonable for this industry? Or, as lakelander asks, which of these standards needs to be modified to create a set of regulations that both sides find reasonable?

[fsujax]

I like the digital billboards I do not understand what all the fuss is. We are a city, get over it. Even little ole Clayton, Ga in the foothills of the Smoky Mtns has a digital billboard along US 441.

[Dog Walker]

So is this about actual billboard issues or is it about making sure that Clear specifically doesnt make any money from advertising?

It's about billboards and the use of public property (roads) for private profit at the expense of visual blight.

I don't care if it's Clear Channel, CBS, Lamar or Joe Blow.

It's also about the death of other forms of advertising.  Newspapers and magazines have seen the circulation and ad revenues decline.  We hop past ads with our DVRs.  We throw away the paper ads that are thrown in our yards and discard the ad sections in the Sunday paper if we even get it.  Polls are showing less than a 3% "hit" rate on those forms of advertising.  Most of us have ad blockers on our browsers and recognize spam without opening it.  Junk mail goes straight into the recycle bin.

Where can they get captive eyeballs?  Out in the public spaces.  The sides of buses, billboards, etc.  Give them a foothold and they will try to cover every possible public surface with advertising since that is almost the last place left for them since we don't like to look at their crap.  All to force you to see their message.

[Dog Walker]

It still allows billboards in places they are not now.

[HisBuffPVB]

The citizens spoke in 1987. City Council and the city Counsel should both be on guard to prevent anymore erosion of this public outcry Those who are working on this, should follow the money, publicly out those who support, those lobbyist who are working on it, and those who stand to benefit. As someone once said, Follow the Money.

[m74reeves]

LUZ council states that a workshop is going to be held to discuss intracacies of this.

[Charles Hunter]

I guess one relevant question would be, 'what zoning classes allow billboards now?'  The proposed ordinance will allow billboards in all commercial districts, including Commercial Neighborhood and Commercial Office:

(d) Authorized Locations. Replacement off-site commercial signs shall be restricted to the following commercial, industrial and governmental zoning districts, subject to the performance standards and residential proximity restrictions set forth herein:
(1) Commercial Community/General-1 (CCG-1)
(2) Commercial Community/General-2 (CCG-2)
(3) Commercial Office (CO)
(4) Commercial, Residential and Office (CRO)
(5) Commercial Neighborhood (CN)
(6) Commercial Central Business District (CCBD)
(7) Industrial Business Park (IBP)
(8 ) Industrial Light (IL)
(9) Industrial Heavy (IH)
(10) Public Buildings and Facilities-1 (PBF-1)
(11) Public Buildings and Facilities-2 (PBF-2)
(12) Planned Unit Development (PUD), so long as the permitted uses of the PUD are similar to the aforementioned conventional zoning districts.

Note #10 and #11 - Public Buildings and Facilities - billboards could come to a park or government building near you.  (Yes, that should mean revenue for the City, but I trust the City to find a way to screw that up.)
Does the current code allow billboards in CO, CN, and CRO?  If the rest of the new ordinance were to pass, with the 2-for-1 swap down and new billboards, could they be in your neighborhood (unless you are in Springfield or Riverside-Avondale which are protected)?  They just have be 200 feet from a house on the same side of the street - no minimum distance if it is across the street. 

(g) Separation from residential districts. Any replacement off-site commercial sign allowed by this section shall be set back at least 200 linear feet from any residential zoning district along the same side of the roadway.

stephendare, I know I am not going to convince you to even understand that some people may not want to see billboards where they have never been before, or where they have been removed, and especially don't want to see a bright LED board a couple hundred feet from their house.

[Charles Hunter]

Hmmm ... thought I had ... I'm sure I "thought" it ...
They would be legal in a  Commercial Neighborhood zoning, which would be, by definition I think, near a neighborhood.  As evidenced by how hard they fought for the digital billboards a couple years ago, the industry wants the new tech - they can sell  the same space  (whatever 24 hours divided by 8 seconds comes to) many times.  Now, without looking at detailed zoning maps, I can't say how prevalent this zoning combination is - but would expect there are a goodly number of these locations in the county along roads with sufficient traffic to justify such a sign.

The example that Mr. Arpin used was the Miramar shopping center, where San Jose and Hendrick meet.  The center is zoned CCG and is a triangle more than 600' from the point to the homes north of the center.  A digital board could go near the point at the south end of the property, and be right across both San Jose and Hendricks from several single family homes.  It doesn't matter how close residences are if they are across the street from the sign.  Guessing the traffic along there would justify a digital sign.  If I had more time, I am sure I could find some good CN or CO examples.