Charlotte Council skeptical on varying billboards

Tue, Jul. 17, 2007


Proposed changes to the city's billboard ordinance fueled debate among Charlotte City Council members during a public hearing Monday night.
The changes, which are backed by the billboard industry, would restrict the size, height and location of electronic billboards to interstates in industrial areas. The proposal also increases the space required between the "tri-vision" billboards, which have slats that flip ads, and electronic billboards, which are like flat-screen televisions.
But it was the frequency of ads changing and concern over driver distraction that generated the most discussion. A key issue is that the proposal would allow the signs to change once every eight seconds.
In 2005, the two largest billboard companies in the area asked for changes to the city's billboard ordinance to address the new digital technology in the sign industry. Planners then formed a group of residents, business owners and billboard companies to suggest ordinance changes.
Billboards along highways are governed by state law but also by the city's ordinance, which isn't as lenient. The city's rules are supposed to take precedence.
But under state rules, electronic billboards can switch ads once every eight seconds, while the city's rules say they can only switch once every 24 hours. During Monday's presentation, planners showed a number of electronic billboards that violate the city's ordinance.
"So they (the billboard companies) are asking us to legalize what they're already doing illegally?" Councilman Michael Barnes said.
A lawyer for Adams argued that the city's ordinance doesn't specify rules for the electronic signs changing. Those rules are only city policy, which is different.
Council members also said they were concerned about electronic signs creating driver distraction and clutter.
"We're not going to eliminate clutter, we're going to add to it?" Councilman Andy Dulin asked.
Electronic-sign backers say studies have shown there is no correlation between electronic billboards and accidents, said Bailie Morlidge, a real-estate manager for Adams Outdoor Advertising.
William Keenan said he doesn't buy it.
A resident member of the planning group, Keenan argued that the group started out balanced but, after some people dropped out, it was heavy on billboard representatives.
He urged the council to study the issue further before voting on the proposal. The proposal will be on the council's agenda in August.
"Think of drivers already distracted by their cell phones, " he said. "... Consider the impact if the next ad is J.Lo in a bikini. It has to be a distraction."

Source: Charlotte Observer by VICTORIA CHERRIE