Digital billboards signal battle on Jacksonville regulations

[thelakelander]

Here we go again....

The possible arrival of digital billboards in Jacksonville is opening a new battle in how the city regulates billboards.

Clear Channel Outdoors has won approval of city attorneys to install digital billboards - that could change messages every eight seconds - at eight locations in Jacksonville.

But the plan faces fierce criticism by opponents who say it violates a 1995 settlement limiting billboards in the city.

Bill Brinton, an attorney for Scenic Jacksonville, the nonprofit group that pushed the billboard restrictions when voters approved them in a City Charter election, said the legal settlement of those regulations never contemplated digital billboards being allowed in Jacksonville.

"I know this: It's a violation of the settlement agreement," Brinton said.

Digital billboards are the newest innovation in the billboard industry. Clear Channel sells advertising space on digital billboards in 31 metropolitan areas nationwide, according to the company's website.

full article: http://jacksonville.com/business/2010-12-13/story/digital-billboards-signal-battle-jacksonville-regulations

[fsujax]

Good. Someone tell Brinton to get over it!

[Jason]

Personally, I don't have a problem with them as long as they replace an existing billboard and are the same size as whatever it replaces.  They actually look pretty cool.

[Bativac]

I say again... get rid of the sign ordinance.

There's already one comment in the article calling for the ban of all electronic billboards. Have these people never driven thru Orlando? These billboards are extremely sharp and allow for greater design possibilities than old-fashioned billboards. Not only that - but you are less likely to see weather-beaten strips of old billboard hanging around waiting for someone to come out and clean it up.

The attorney for Scenic Jacksonville makes it sound like these things are going to be shining directly in someone's face.

I am inclined to agree that changing every 8 seconds may be a little much, but I don't think this is something there should be a law against.

God forbid somebody bring their money to Jacksonville and make it a little easier for someone to advertise their business.

[Ocklawaha]

I don't have a problem with using the digital stuff as REPLACEMENTS for the ones that are apparently exempt from the ruling, but 8 new spots and we're back to ugly ass Orlando roads... As if OURS were landscaped and maintained to any standards.

Does have possibilities though...

"BLINK...RIDE THE STREETCAR...BLINK...RIDE THE STREETCAR...BLINK...RIDE THE STREETCAR!"

OCKLAWAHA

[Ernest Street]

The only billboards I liked around here were the slick targeted Liquor adds off Beaver street

Seriously,I was witness to the birth of the "Digital Zipper" when I worked in Atlantic City for several, months in 89'
They are a distraction,light pollution,and an unnecessary animation of our landscape.
Who is regulating brightness? When all the LEDS are on it is blinding white.and can flash at you like in AC.
My world doesn't move like a ADD soundbite,or a Tom Cruise movie.
The old billboards are not to be repaired or replaced as I last understood.
The old style boards also had downward facing lights that did not light pollute...LEDS blast out horizontally.

[simms3]

What I wrote on FTU:

There is a balance.  There is visual blight/distraction, and then there is attractive advertising and signage.  I have seen good digital billboards and bad.  I have a bad one that is bright and flashy at night right across from my condo in Atlanta.  Unfortunately, due to the vagueness of the 1995 sign ordinance, "visual blight" applies not only to billboards, but to signs on businesses and other things.  I agree with one of the posters that Jacksonville looks extremely dead, which is at least if not more damaging to businesses and development than looking "too alive" if you will.


Here in Atlanta, digital LED's have been applied to lots of new signs, to a new highway overpass, and to a new office building lobby.  The latter two examples are almost tourist attractions now and really add a lot.  The signs also make it appear like the city is 24/7 now, which is great and may have played a role in attracting more people and businesses to Midtown, Downtown, and Buckhead.

The bottom line is that the sign ordinance needs to be revised to be more specific, lenient on individual properties (only in Jax do you need to sit before several design boards and committees to beg to have a sign on your building), and smart about billboards.  There is a place and a way for everything.  Simple, vague bans are ineffective and a hindrance on progress.

**Finally, current digital billboards need only 1/4 to 1/3 as many LEDs as many currently use to be effective.  LEDs are very efficient, cool (temp wise), and expensive.  I agree with Mr. Brinton that 8 seconds is cutting it close and it should be 3 minutes, but perhaps it could be written into law how bright or how many LEDs are used at night to avoid problems.  Fans would not have to be used and very little energy would be used if softer tones and less LEDs were used at night.

[stjr]

If you thought the signs on bus shelters was controversial, this is likely to elevate the discussion to new levels.  I must say there are some compelling posts following the T-U article regarding why these signs are not good for Jacksonville, including its economy.

No need to rewrite them, I'll just quote them, starting with Bill Brinton:

By Bill Brinton | 12/13/10 - 06:42 am

To Raymond Hernandez, Jr.

I did not say that it made no sense for Jacksonville to have such a different standard from the City of Atlantic Beach, the City of Jacksonville Beach, and the City of Neptune Beach. I pointed out the inconsistency between the emphasis on aesthetics and traffic safety at the Beaches versus what will be happening on the other side of "the ditch."

In fact, I recently supported a codification/clarification of the City's current interpretation of the sign ordinance-by the both the Building Department and the Planning Department that set the change at 3 minute intervals-although a longer period would be more appropriate. At 3 minutes - this would allow 20 changes per hour. Is there any reason that 20 changes per hour is not enough? The City of Houston sets the time frame for changes at 5 minutes, 12 changes per hour, and there are over 700 electronic changing message signs operating quite well within the City of Houston.

The City of Atlantic Beach does not allow any electronic changing message devices, except for time and temperature (although most of us don't need a sign to tell us what time it is or whether it is cold outside). The City of Neptune Beach does not allow any electronic message signs (which amended its Code in May 2010). The City of Jacksonville Beach (which amended its Code in September 2010) allows electronic changeable message signs that change no more once every 24 hours.

The Clear Channel Outdoor lobbyists (and there are at least four who have registered so far, and the billboard spokesman Mr. Munz) can lobby legislators to take Jacksonville backwards and then turn their sights on the Beaches, but this City deserves better.

As for digital billboards that utilize extremely bright lighting that shines outward and operate (5,000 nits or more during the day) with changes at every 8 seconds (672-sf or 300-sf in size), these billboards will be aesthetic blight along our roadways and will pose serious concerns about traffic safety. In Durham, N.C., residents sent in over 1000 emails to their city council asking that digital billboards not be allowed, and city council voted no unanimously. The State of Michigan has imposed a moratorium on digital billboards. A court in Los Angeles struck down a "settlement agreement" between the City and Clear Channel Outdoor that allowed swap outs for digital billboards as unlawful.

I would like to debate anyone who claims that from an "appearance perspective" there will be "no difference." The truth or falsity of that claim will become quite obvious once these digital billboards go up.

The City Council has been lobbied by Clear Channel Outdoor to weaken the law to 8 seconds so that Clear Channel Outdoor can make a boatload of money at the expense of Jacksonville's beauty. From a safety standpoint, one should know that some of these television type billboards will be at signalized intersections like one on San Jose Blvd., or long interstate on-ramps such as the northbound on-ramp from University Blvd. headed north along I-95.

I hope that members of the City Council will change their mind once they are better informed. They should call the City of Houston and find out what works.

Bill Brinton

By jdhunter | 12/13/10 - 06:32 am

From an appearance perspective there is a HUGE difference between a passive billboard seen by reflected light and a swarm of garishly colored electronic devices EMITTING LIGHT. They are UGLY and distracting. BAN them.

I recommend to all taking note of anything you see advertised on an electronic billboard and NEVER BUYING IT.

By VoiceOfReason | 12/13/10 - 11:32 am

@smallbusiness

> It is the myopic perspective of folks like Bill Brinton, for Scenic
> Jacksonville that continue to stifle economic growth opportunities
> for the city of Jacksonville. As a result, Jacksonville will continue
> to be an unattractive, if not hostile, environment for entrepreneurs
> and small business owners considering to invest in the local
> economy.

Let me guess, you're one of these small business owners that think it's acceptable to pepper our intersections and medians with signs that advertise your business too?

Kind of ironic that you think making our city unattractive to drive through will make it more attractive for entrepreneurs. We don't really need you that bad then.

By beautyisgoodforbusiness | 12/13/10 - 02:46 pm

@ small business. Really? It would be more accurate to say that folks like Bill Brinton are working to encourage Jacksonville's economic growth. It's a well known fact in the development community that beauty is good for business. Electronic billboards that obscure vistas and contribute to light pollution are not in line with a community's aesthetic interests.

Your "smallbusiness" interests don't pertain to the electronic sign industry, do they?

Besides, the citizens of this city spoke loudly and clearly when they voted to amend the charter in order not to allow any new billboards. The sign industry sued over that amendment, and the city won. It is because of those lawsuits that most of the billboards currently existing in this city have to come down in the near future.

To allow sign companies to erect digital billboards is clearly counter to the purposes of the settlement agreement, not to mention the city charter.

P.S. @ uncluttered_streets. Right on.

By Mary Tracy | 12/13/10 - 01:24 pm

Jacksonville residents are lucky to have a smart, saavy attorney like Bill Brinton protecting the city's charm and unique visual assets, eliminating a major source of driver distraction and preventing this energy guzzling technology from sucking power from your grid.

While traditional billboards need only be lit at night, the LED digital signs are lit 24 hours a day, and in daylight hours, they consume the most energy to compete with the sun in order to be seen. In warm weather, the thousands of diodes which comprise an LED billboard get very hot so air conditioning units are imbedded in the sign.

Clear Channel does not tell decision maker that one LED billboard consumes more energy than 25 traditional billboards, or enough energy to power 30 average homes.

That Federal Highways Administration will soon release the results of a driver impact study measuring eye glance reactions to digital signs along the roadway. The highly regarded AASHTO report released in 2009, found that every study released to date (except the two funded by the billboard industry) has shown that these bright dazzling signs distract, especially youthful and elderly drivers. The 100 Driver Study found that anything that takes the driver's eyes off the road for more than two seconds dramatically increases the risk for a crash or near crash.

Throughout the country our most cherished scenic resources and hometown assets are being obscured by a blizzard of billboards-digital and standard- that have been put up despite local laws and local objections. Don't let that happen in Jacksonville, your city and its citizens deserve better !

[simms3]

Just checked what was on the digital billboard across from my condo.  It was a tasteful advertisement with warm tones and near constant appearance.  It had the snowcapped mountain with a dark blue sky and a variation between Coors cans and a few words.  It was not bright or distracting.  I see no problem with such ads in Jacksonville.  Other ads are bright, obnoxious, distracting, and distasteful.  These ads don't need to be allowed in the city, but the billboards themselves should not be banned outright due to a vaguery in the current code.

[spuwho]

You mean I can't see an electronic billboard for:

- Boiled Peanuts
- Indian River Fruit
- No scalpel Vasectomy
- Fireworks
- Liposuction

[Singejoufflue]

Maybe Clear Channel could sweeten the negotiations by offering COJ free advertising on these billboards...highlight all the great civic activity here in the city...

[Ralph W]

As I said in another thread...

Let's have some signs...


http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_16463535
http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_16632214
http://www.livedowntowndenver.com/LDDBlog/?p=1713
http://www.ellmanco.com/denver.aspx

[Ernest Street]

I think opinion on this matters with age. Some older folks REMEMBER the natural landscape and aren't impressed with Glitzy Bling and Flash.
How do flashing billboards make us look any less like Orlando? (Think International Drive)
Clear Channel cannot get a free pass on everything. Four lobbyists... 

[Bativac]

I really had no idea people here had such strong opinions on signage. I guess it shouldn't surprise me.

I and other young would-be entrepeneurs will just concentrate our efforts on leaving town, I guess, and going someplace hungry and eager for independent businesses. It's clear there's no future here, except for people who want to be left alone to watch TV or eat at a chain restaurant (as long as it isn't located downtown).

[vicupstate]

One thing that I always felt made Jax stand out in a good way, was the relative lack of billboards. Billboard-free Butler Blvd. is a prime example to that.  

Billboard are visual pollution and add absolutely nothing to a city's vitality, IMO. Times Square is the exception that proves the rule. Caving in to crass commercialism is not a virtue.  Spend some time in billboard-free Colorado and then cross the line into Wyoming.