H-S: Billboard owners look for okay to upgrade

Billboards are one of those roadside un-attractions that everyone loves to hate. I'm no exception -- and one of the first things I noticed, and loved, upon moving to Durham was the fact that throughout the Triangle region, there are almost no billboards along corridors like I-40.

Ray Gronberg's interesting billboard story in the H-S this morning fills in some of the historical pieces as to how we got there, including Durham's decade-long battle with the outdoor advertising industry that led to the removal of two-thirds of the billboards in the Bull City.

Durham wasn't able to remove billboards in major highway corridors like I-85, US 70 and 15-501, where Federal law protects the right of incumbents to remain -- though under the City's ordinance, if the billboards are destroyed or removed, new ones couldn't be erected.

All of which is extremely relevant given the proposal by Fairway Outdoor Advertising, which approached the Joint City/County Planning Committee yesterday asking permission to replace many traditional billboards with new digital signs.

The JCCPC agreed to move the subject along for review by the Planning Department, a move Gronberg's story notes is likely to receive significant opposition from neighborhood and environmental activists.

According to the H-S, Diane Catotti took the strongest line in wanting to kill the proposal, with Mike Woodard and Becky Heron taking a more moderate path. (Woodard proposed allowing some sign replacements in exchange for Fairway reducing its overall billboard numbers.) Lewis Cheek and Cora Cole-McFadden supported the ordinance change.

Comments

[Ginny]

Has anyone reviewed council member's campaign finance reports lately to see whether Fairway has donated any funds to council? This was a huge issue on Hilton Head, with several state representatives accepting a lot of money from the billboard industry. Those same representatives always seemed to support requests to keep those signs on the roadways.

[Tar Heelz]

Our councilmembers and commissioners *may* have received billboard money but they *certainly* received cash from who would oppose any billboard in any location under any circumstances.

Not sure, at day's end, what that tells us about the wisdom of the policy choice.

[anon]

These electronic billboards are a terrible idea. Drive up I-95 by Phillip-Morris, just south of Richmond. A big, bright, flashing billboard dominates your view.

It's more like a huge flat screen TV than a traditional bill board. New ads are splashed on the screen every ten seconds or so. We don't need this kind of clutter on our roadways.

With cars entering and exiting the interstate in an urban setting, the last thing we need is a big bright distraction flashing outside the window.

[Todd]

Instead of making this compromise, Durham should be working to take away the billboard companies market share by pushing logo signs for I-85. If the hotels, restaurants, and gas stations had a place on the logo signs, they would be less likely to buy ad space on the billboards, too.

For some reason, these signs have never been placed on I-85 between 15-501 and US 70. There is one set of them on northbound 85 at Cole Mill Rd, but then no more until Club Blvd.

In any case, this billboard 'upgrade' does not sound like a good idea. The last thing Durham drivers need is a flashy jumbotron-like distraction.

[ellen]

I HATE those flashing billboards. There's one on 52 in Winston-Salem, and I nearly ran off the road the first time I came by it in heavy traffic just as it changed messages. Drivers, especially me!, do not need these distractions. Enough with the visual litter!

[Seth Vidal]

I concur with many of the above comments. We should be doing more to eliminate billboards and visual pollution, not enhancing it.

[Wes]

Billboards, like everything in life, have an appropriate time and place. While billboards are inappropriate for rural highways, in my opinion they don't detract from the visual aesthetics of an urban setting or multi-lane highway. As for the digital billboards; you'll get used to them and eventually ignore them just like all the rest.

[Valerie]

No flashing billboards! Yuck.

[Mike Woodard]

A couple of points.

1) I didn't propose allowing some sign replacements in exchange for Fairway reducing its overall billboard numbers. That idea was suggested by Interim City Attorney Karen Sindelar, who led the City's legal team in the suit filed by billboard companies 10 years ago. I do think it's an interesting idea to consider.

2) @TarHeelz: Corporations are prohibited from donating to candidates' campaign funds, so you won't be able to find Fairway in any of our reports. However, corporate executives are not restricted from donating as private citizens. Candidates must report the name, occupation, and employer of any donation of $50 or more. You'll have to do a little digging to find if billboard executives donated to campaigns. Since you asked, and to save you some time, I received donations from both supporters and opponents of billboards.

[hurley]

I remember the McDonald's on Hillsborough Rd had a big fight with the city about 8 years ago about the new city ordinance that signs couldn't be higher that 12 feet. They had a 100 foot sign with the arches that was visible from 85, 15-501, and the Expressway. They said that if they had to take down that sign they'd go out of business. People said they were exaggerating and everyone, led by the Herald-Sun, made fun of them. They took it to court and lost.

They've been out of business for about a year now, after at least 30 years in that location. Shouldn't an art gallery have moved into that location by now?

[cranky]

That nasty McDonald's -should- have gone out of business. It was a crapshoot to see if you got what you ordered, stuffed in a bag with a side of 'tude. However, they just moved farther out Hillsborough Road, just past Wendy's.

[Will]

Don't shoot me for saying this...but I've often thought that if Durham should ever emulate the city of Cary for any reason it should be their sign ordinances.