More at Tulsa World (//%22http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectID=11&articleID=071026_1_A11_hThec27666%22)
quote:
The City Council on Thursday unanimously approved an ordinance that temporarily bans LED billboards until May 1.
The ordinance also restricts the night-time brightness for existing and any newly installed smaller versions of light-emitting-diode business signs located on commercial properties.
"This is a very complicated issue and has created some potential turmoil," Councilor Bill Martinson said.
He said the issues range from safety hazards due to blinding light and distractions, to city esthetics with Las Vegas-type signage.
"It potentially affects our quality of life," he said.
The high-tech, larger-than-life billboards project digital television-like images with motion and brilliant lighting that flash and flip advertisements.
The ordinance will give the city time to establish regulations for the new technology.
The types of signs banned include digital and electronic billboards, digital display boards, and electronic variable message signs.
The council's action comes at the plea of
the city's Board of Adjustment, which has been bombarded by requests seeking special permission to install LED billboards.
quote:
Originally posted by MichaelC
More at Tulsa World (//%22http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectID=11&articleID=071026_1_A11_hThec27666%22)
quote:
The City Council on Thursday unanimously approved an ordinance that temporarily bans LED billboards until May 1.
The ordinance also restricts the night-time brightness for existing and any newly installed smaller versions of light-emitting-diode business signs located on commercial properties.
"This is a very complicated issue and has created some potential turmoil," Councilor Bill Martinson said.
He said the issues range from safety hazards due to blinding light and distractions, to city esthetics with Las Vegas-type signage.
"It potentially affects our quality of life," he said.
The high-tech, larger-than-life billboards project digital television-like images with motion and brilliant lighting that flash and flip advertisements.
The ordinance will give the city time to establish regulations for the new technology.
The types of signs banned include digital and electronic billboards, digital display boards, and electronic variable message signs.
The council's action comes at the plea of
the city's Board of Adjustment, which has been bombarded by requests seeking special permission to install LED billboards.
Where's Patric? I'd love to hear what he has to say about this. I've learned more about lighting in the few months I've been on this forum than in all my 50 previous years of living.
My bad - he's already on this - http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1777
What a waste of precious tax dollars. We need the government to fix the big problems and quit messing with insignifigant little side projects like this.
they are garish. I hope this means that nasty **** at 71st/yale gets turned off. The make the town look like a strip in Las Vegas.
What about the annoying new signs at Sonic??
The one in Jenks lights up the town at night. It's very annoying.
Sonic signs should be made to shut off when the store does, and dim if possible during the night.
Jenks School system wants to install LED boards on it's campuses, and is asking the Board of Adjustment for variances to allow larger-than-allowed size (almost 54 sq ft.) and waive regulations against flashing lights. The staff has already noted that the proposed signs are too close to residential areas.
Some of the applications:
East Intermediate School
http://www.incog.org/City%20of%20Tulsa%20BOA/BOA%20Agenda/20640a.pdf
East Elementary School
http://www.incog.org/City%20of%20Tulsa%20BOA/BOA%20Agenda/20641a.pdf
The only one I've found personally distracting, while driving, is the one at the NE corner of the Library downtown.
It sits low to be viewed at driver's level. Not real big, but bright with lots of motion.
Very distracting.
NO! No more LED signs! I see that the TMAPC is taking up some language changes on them. Ban them altogether. They invade your personal visual space. The only thing that has a right to do that is an emergency vehicle.
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
NO! No more LED signs! I see that the TMAPC is taking up some language changes on them. Ban them altogether. They invade your personal visual space. The only thing that has a right to do that is an emergency vehicle.
There's still supposed to be a moratorium in effect, but I see new ones still going in, and existing ones in violation of the intensity limits.
Drive down south Memorial and try to distinguish them from ambulances.
quote:
Originally posted by patric
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
NO! No more LED signs! I see that the TMAPC is taking up some language changes on them. Ban them altogether. They invade your personal visual space. The only thing that has a right to do that is an emergency vehicle.
There's still supposed to be a moratorium in effect, but I see new ones still going in, and existing ones in violation of the intensity limits.
Drive down south Memorial and try to distinguish them from ambulances.
the ones I'm thinking of are on 71st. The one at 71st/Yale and the one at 71st/Mingo (Al's scumbag Bistro)
71st and Riverside at the Creek Donation Center. Soo bright at night that I have to put my visor down to keep from wrecking the car.
The one at ORU is not much better, but my little girl does like to see Elmo on it every time we drive by, so it's a wash!
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
NO! No more LED signs! I see that the TMAPC is taking up some language changes on them. Ban them altogether. They invade your personal visual space. The only thing that has a right to do that is an emergency vehicle.
I was struck this morning by all the regular illuminated signage out around town. Code enforcement here sucks big time. I'd prefer LED to old empty see throughs....
Negativity abounds on this forum. Personal attacks on places and people. Such public banter looks and sounds childish and cheapens the whole forum. Tulsa Now...what is the point? I am getting lost in the lack of moderation.
Back on topic....establish codes and enforce them or we will look like a city in Misouri that starts with a J and is on the other end of I-44.
Where is the upside? Where is the hope? Is winter that long that all you (we) CAN DO IS *****?
quote:
Originally posted by safetyguy
What about the annoying new signs at Sonic??
The one in Jenks lights up the town at night. It's very annoying.
Agreed on that one, I complained and have noticed that it is now dimmed from the previous GLARE level and even off when closed early mornings.
Two thumbs up for the Tulsa Council for making this move before it got any worse!
I love communities (see several of them out east)where billboards and huge advertisements are not allowed. I see nothing wrong with this approach. Some communities desire a more "peaceful" drive with all the [fill in the blank] adds that we are "forced" to see as we drive to work and home.
Again though, because we live in a state that does not allow municipalities to collect property taxes, cities are in essence forced to think that Economic Development and promoting business is the only choice they have. Cities that directly benefit from property assessments like huge billboards and annoying lights less because it decreases property values in a regional market.
Again, great work on those of you who have helped to make this ban possible. Now we just need to make it permanent. (Unless you like the Vegas look. [;)]
Sid
Gwen Freeman on KFAQ talked but this a few months ago on her morn. radio show. I think LED signs are a good thing. We have them all over the mid-west. Jeers to "T" Towne for banning them.[xx(]
quote:
Gwen Freeman on KFAQ talked but this a few months ago on her morn. radio show. I think LED signs are a good thing. We have them all over the mid-west. Jeers to "T" Towne for banning them.
What was Gwen's thoughts on the subject? I missed that show.
LED TVs aren't allowed on your dashboard for a simple reason, they are dangerous and distracting. Same thing with LED signs on the side of the road. The technology is such now that ANYTHING could pop up at ANY time. Time for them to go.
did anyone go to the ordinance change at TMAPC yesterday? There wre a boatload of people there to speak on it, and it unfortunately looked like a bunch of business types. I hope the TMAPC wasn't swayed.
One requirement I liked in the changes was that the sign owners would be required to display amber alerts and other emergency information. I think that is fair, although there is an interesting business opportunity to integrate a centralized emergency alert system into all of these privately owned signs.
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
did anyone go to the ordinance change at TMAPC yesterday? There wre a boatload of people there to speak on it, and it unfortunately looked like a bunch of business types. I hope the TMAPC wasn't swayed.
In the past, the big sign companies get their biggest users (ORU, car dealerships, etc) to show up in force and claim their free speech is being violated by sign regulations.
quote:
Originally posted by patric
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
did anyone go to the ordinance change at TMAPC yesterday? There wre a boatload of people there to speak on it, and it unfortunately looked like a bunch of business types. I hope the TMAPC wasn't swayed.
In the past, the big sign companies get their biggest users (ORU, car dealerships, etc) to show up in force and claim their free speech is being violated by sign regulations.
AHH! That would explain the guys in the white shirts that looked like they needed a job. i guess the car salesmen showed up in force.
funny, I am not aware of any reputable dealers that use LED signage.
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
quote:
Originally posted by patric
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
did anyone go to the ordinance change at TMAPC yesterday? There wre a boatload of people there to speak on it, and it unfortunately looked like a bunch of business types. I hope the TMAPC wasn't swayed.
In the past, the big sign companies get their biggest users (ORU, car dealerships, etc) to show up in force and claim their free speech is being violated by sign regulations.
AHH! That would explain the guys in the white shirts that looked like they needed a job. i guess the car salesmen showed up in force.
funny, I am not aware of any reputable dealers that use LED signage.
Doesn't Glover on Skelly have a large LED sign?
quote:
Originally posted by Townsend
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
quote:
Originally posted by patric
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
did anyone go to the ordinance change at TMAPC yesterday? There wre a boatload of people there to speak on it, and it unfortunately looked like a bunch of business types. I hope the TMAPC wasn't swayed.
In the past, the big sign companies get their biggest users (ORU, car dealerships, etc) to show up in force and claim their free speech is being violated by sign regulations.
AHH! That would explain the guys in the white shirts that looked like they needed a job. i guess the car salesmen showed up in force.
funny, I am not aware of any reputable dealers that use LED signage.
Doesn't Glover on Skelly have a large LED sign?
I said "reputable" dealers.
LED signs are back on the TMAPC agenda for this week's meeting: Wed, March 26, 2008, 1:30 PM, Francis Campbell City Council Room, Tulsa Civic Center
Here's what it says in the agenda:
11. Consider an Ordinance Amending Chapter 42 of the Zoning Code of the City of Tulsa
Consider proposed amendments of the Zoning Code, City of Tulsa, Oklahoma by adding a new Section for "Off-Premise Digital Signs", a new definition for "digital signs" and providing for penalties and publication. (Draft Ordinance to be distributed at the meeting.)
I'm one of those people who find them distracting and tacky. Whatever happens in Vegas should stay in Vegas. I don't know what the "draft ordinance" will include, but I'm going to try to make it to the meeting. I encourage anyone else who wants to reign in unnecessary signage from our streets to attend and speak up.
Learn more about the impact of digital billboards (//%22http://www.scenic.org/billboards/digital%22) from the folks at Scenic America.
One of the interesting things I've learned is that the "studies" that suggest that digital billboards have no negative impact on driver safety were funded by...yep...the billboard industry. Real world experience has shown me that drivers tend to slam on their brakes when a bright digital billboard suddenly leaps to life. And I'm sure that people who are "watching" the billboard TV are not paying attention to pedestrians, cyclists and other motorists on the road.
If you care about this issue, you'll want to learn more about Scenic America (//%22http://www.scenic.org/%22), an organization that works to:
Reduce billboard blight in America
Promote good community planning and design guidelines
Keep America's highways and byways scenic
Promote scenic easements for open space and scenic resource conservation
Ensure mitigation of the visual impact of telecommunication towers
Promote context sensitive highway solutions
Promote tree conservation
Promote undergrounding of overhead utiltiy wires
i'm of the more economical side of this argument. If you have to do something that stops just short of leaping on my car hood and yelling at me about your product, then you probably don't need to be in business.
I find that for the most part, people resorting to LED signs sell cheap **** that isn't worth what they charge for it.
LED sign users:
Sunshine Furniture
Al's Bistro
Cosi and their co tenants at 71st/yale
Carpetworld
and I've been told Glover Chevy.
yes, those are all quality establishments selling quality goods....[8)]
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
i'm of the more economical side of this argument. If you have to do something that stops just short of leaping on my car hood and yelling at me about your product, then you probably don't need to be in business.
I find that for the most part, people resorting to LED signs sell cheap **** that isn't worth what they charge for it.
LED sign users:
Sunshine Furniture
Al's Bistro
Cosi and their co tenants at 71st/yale
Carpetworld
and I've been told Glover Chevy.
yes, those are all quality establishments selling quality goods....[8)]
+Sonic
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
i'm of the more economical side of this argument. If you have to do something that stops just short of leaping on my car hood and yelling at me about your product, then you probably don't need to be in business.
I find that for the most part, people resorting to LED signs sell cheap **** that isn't worth what they charge for it.
LED sign users:
Sunshine Furniture
Al's Bistro
Cosi and their co tenants at 71st/yale
Carpetworld
and I've been told Glover Chevy.
yes, those are all quality establishments selling quality goods....[8)]
+Sonic
pft...duh...yeah they are the worst offender due to the number of them all over town.
Some are a little harder to figure out.
You would wonder why the city-county library system needs to stop traffic with
GUEST
SPEAKER
GUEST
SPEAKER
GUEST
SPEAKER
GUEST
SPEAKER
...when a more subtle marquis crawl would do.
Same for schools. What product are they selling that I need to rear-end the car stopped at the crosswalk in front of me to read?
The sign industry points to a lack of documentation of sign-related traffic accidents -- but that's all it is; a lack of documentation. If the police dont think about it you wont find it in the report.
Does anyone actually believe glare or stroboscopic light doesnt cause accidents in Tulsa?
Well, I missed the TMAPC meeting about LED signs that I had planned on attending. Approval now goes back to the City Council. The planning commission apparantly spent their time considering the spacing between signs...not whether or not Tulsa wants them in the first place.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=20080327_1_A5_hTheP44056
Whenever there's a discussion about banning billboards or signs or any form of blight, it always gets turned into a pity party for the "little billboard company that would go out of busienss." I don't understand this.
If your company made money by spreading garbage along the roadways, nobody would hesitate to shut you down. Why do we take pity on one or two businesses that make Tulsa look trashy? In the case of LED signs, it's not just offensive, it's unsafe. So what's the deal?
quote:
Originally posted by twizzler
Personally, I think there is a big difference between LED signs attached to businesses/schools/libraries/etc that distractingly flicker, flash and scroll at high rates; and LED billboards along the freeway that slowly cycle through various full screen messages.
The difference is simply a matter of programming. It's the same technology on different scales -- one can do pretty much the same as the other -- but the billboard industry has been holding back on the most annoying aspects of LED billboards until they have a foothold.
Interesting to note that some of the 'Burbs are interested in this, as well. (Something tells me Broken Arrow wont be among them)
From the Bixby Architectural Committee:
Jim Powell thanked Erik Enyart for including printouts of Tulsa World articles regarding the Tulsa City Council's recent moratorium on LED-lighted signs and noted that Bill Christiansen was a friend of his.
Erik Enyart noted that the wording on the restriction on the lighted signs for the Zoning Codes for Tulsa and Bixby are, if not identical, very similar. Mr. Enyart stated that he could confirm this statement with INCOG/TMAPC, but believed that LED signs were required to go to the
Board of Adjustment for a Variance from the prohibition on the flashing or intermittently-lighted sign restriction, and that all of these LED signs that have been approved in Bixby were probably supposed to get a Board of Adjustment Variance also.
Mr. Enyart noted that the articles stated that the Tulsa Board of Adjustment has been overwhelmed by the requests for Variances for LED signs.
Jim Powell stated that several other cities were working to try to rewrite their zoning laws in regard to signage, including bans preventing lights from flickering, providing animation, or changing colors. Mr. Powell noted that Portland, OR allows LED signs but has a restriction that the message is limited to change messages one (1) time per day, and the colors are limited to one (1) per day.
David Skaggs asked if this will take over the grandfather clause already issued on the approved signs, and Erik Enyart answered that the City Attorney could answer that.
Jim Powell recalled the problem with enforcement of sign restrictions in regard to the owner of Carpet City. Mr. Powell stated that the owner made assurances that the LED sign would comply with flashing and brightness restrictions placed on it in order to get approval, but then did not comply.
Mr. Powell stated that previous City Planner Gene Edwards advised the owner to turn down his lights, which resulted in about 10 days with dimmed lights, but then they were turned up again. Mr. Powell stated that he and Gene Edwards visited the owner, and the owner turned them down for about eight (8) months, until Gene left the city and the lights went back up.
Richard Altmann stated that is why the city needs a code enforcement officer.
Jim Powell stated that he doesn't have any more information to report from the city in Indiana because they are in the process of rewriting their laws and ordinances, according to his friend Carol Beaver.
Beverly Savage suggested a sign ordinance could be passed recognizing that such signs are not in the interest of public safety.
Jim Powell suggested the Committee report to City Council and proposes an ordinance amendment to control signage lighting. Jim Powell suggested that such changes include a restriction to one (1) message and one (1)color per day and that lighting be dimmed at night.
Rewrite an update to the current zoning codes for signage pertaining to LED electronic lights. Jim Powell made a MOTION to petition the City Council for a rewrite and update the current zoning codes for signage pertaining to LED electronic lights. Richard Altmann SECONDED the Motion. Motion Carried.
Hmm, lookie what was installed during the L.E.D. Billboard moratorium...
Its, an L.E.D. Billboard,
on 169 between Best Buy and the furniture store:
(http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-12/1116161/04-01-08_1843a.jpg)
It's completely installed, grass has grown back around the base, appears to be networked and ready to go.
Now who did that I wonder?
Signfxr
4208 South May Avenue
Oklahoma City, OK 73119
Tel: (405)682-6366
Ill work on a better picture, but if there are any more that have suddenly sprouted please make a note of them.
Well. . . I'm told that "technically" it is not a billboard. It is suppose to be a "business" sign for Mathis Brothers. Looks like a duck though, . . . doesn't it.
quote:
Originally posted by Publius
Well. . . I'm told that "technically" it is not a billboard. It is suppose to be a "business" sign for Mathis Brothers. Looks like a duck though, . . . doesn't it.
The sign company name at the bottom would have me doubting that, but it seems Mathis Bros. got an amendment to their PUD to operate an "on-premise business sign" for them and their partners.
The fact that it does happen to be a full-scale LED billboard...
Councilors Eric Gomez and Dennis Troyer told the city council Thursday that they would like LED billboards to be brighter, closer together, and change messages faster.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectID=11&articleID=20080425_1_A9_spanc17770
The proposal was 300 'Nits' (Candellas per square meter) but they want to kick it up to 500 cd/m2.
To give some idea of scale, the average large-screen TV is around 300 cd/m2 (nits). Now imagine that screen the size of a billboard against a nighttime landscape.
Where did Gomez and Troyer get their numbers from? Propably not the residents of the districts they represent.
And of course, they had to travel to OKC to look at a digital billboard because they dont know about the ones already in Tulsa (like the LED billboard at 71st and hy 169).
I spoke to a guy from a local sign company about this issue a few days back:
1. Lamar has a track record of fighting this same fight. They purposefully (according to their competitor) ignore ordinances and place their signs where they please. Then they argue they are already in place, why not just have "generous" restrictions. The "generous" restrictions then place spacing limits that generally allow all their signs to remain but squeeze out the competition - who have followed the rules and don't already have LED signs in place.
He advanced this theory at the ordinance meeting. That is why there was so much talk about spacing, and why the spacing has been reduced. Market money is moving towards LED signs.
2. Supposedly an agreement is on the tablish that will level the playing field and allow LED billboards like most every other market in the United States. Limits on changeovers, little or no animation, brightness control for nights, and some restrictions on placement.
I hope so. A well done LED (read: not OH CRAP bright nor animated) looks so much better than paper that is too often bubbled or pealing. Tulsa would jump right into the marketing technology of the 1990's.
From a TW article on 4/23:
Several councilors have questioned whether the proposed 2,400-foot spacing requirement between light-emitting-diode, or LED, billboards would be competitively unfair.
That could render many of the existing standard billboards, spaced only 1,200 feet apart, obsolete because not all of them could convert to the new technology, councilors pointed out.
Councilor David Patrick has recommended that all existing billboards be allowed to go digital and require the 2,400-foot spacing for new ones.
Clusters of billboards exist that predate even the 1,200-foot rule.
Councilor Bill Martinson, citing the 31st Street and Yale Avenue area along the Broken Arrow Expressway as an example, said he hopes that the ability to go digital will encourage billboard companies to remove some of those signs.
"If some of those signs are to be converted to LED, then some will have to be removed because they are less than 1,200 feet away," he said.
"I'm excited about this technology in the sense that it's an opportunity for us to clean up some of the clutter," Martinson said. "The fact that they're able to change the displays so frequently gives us a legitimate reason to ask that the other signage be removed."
Councilors also have discussed a stipulation that if a sign is not in use for 180 days, it must be removed.
I was driving around yesterday, and noticed that easily 95% of the billboards along our expressways and interstates are owned by Lamar. So we're not talking about some poor, local, family-owned company being put out of business by these restrictions. We're talking about a nation-wide company that earns billions of dollars by spreading sign pollution across America.
Also, put this in perscpective: 1,200 feet is less than a quarter mile. Imagine about 2 city blocks to get the idea. (When driving 60 MPH, you travel a quarter mile every 15 seconds.) How much crap do you want to see?
Also, there are already lots of clusters of billboards that are closer than 1,200 feet. They're not going away. They're "grandfathered in." They WON'T have to go away because they're closer than 1,200 feet. How many more grandfathers do we want?
quote:
Originally posted by PonderInc
Also, put this in perscpective: 1,200 feet is less than a quarter mile. Imagine about 2 city blocks to get the idea. (When driving 60 MPH, you travel a quarter mile every 15 seconds.) How much crap do you want to see?
Also, there are already lots of clusters of billboards that are closer than 1,200 feet. They're not going away. They're "grandfathered in." They WON'T have to go away because they're closer than 1,200 feet. How many more grandfathers do we want?
I noticed that Whistler billboards has been before the BOA regularly seeking exceptions to this, last time they had six or seven new billboards at a time up for consideration.
I dont imagine they get all, but adds are the BOA are giving them some just to keep the sign industry lawyers off their backs.
Having a couple new billboard-friendly city councilors in place may move things along quicker, too.
The 95% figure is a gross overstatement, they are a market leaders - but not THAT much.
Whistler is indeed the people I was speaking with. If the limit as proposed was to take effect Lamar would already have most of the available locations occupied. Shutting everyone else out. The next step is to require the removal "out dated billboards" to avoid clutter. Effectively eliminating competition by ignoring existing laws and getting their agenda to pass.
I stand nothing to gain no matter who wins. I want LED signs simply because I hate that Tulsa is the only city of any size that is using 1950's billboard technology as the status quo. They get outdated fast and look worn out more often than not.
It really shouldn't be that hard. Look at what Portland, OKC, Des Moines, Albuquerque and other similarly sized cities did and make a few calls to ask the various agencies what worked well and what they wish they would have done.
All I did was count the signs I passed on I-44, the BA and 169 as I drove down the road. I definitely counted 9 Lamar signs for every 1 sign that didn't bear their logo. It was not a scientific survey, and I didn't drive down every road in town. Just paid attention to what I passed.
In Portland, OR, they allow digital signs, but do not allow them to be animated, and they are only allowed to change messages once every 24 hours.
In Tulsa, the TMAPC and Sign Advisory Board made recommendations that, among other things, included: limiting the image to change every 12 SECONDS, limits on brightness, and spacing of 2,400 feet (facing same direction).
What does the council talk about?
Allowing the signs to update every 8 seconds, allowing brighter displays than the Sign Advisory Board and TMAPC recommended, and reducing the spacing between signs.
Once again Tulsa proves it's stodgyness while OKC appears to be more progressie. They already have LED bilboards. I was driving to Moore the other week and ran across several of them. Why does it seem like we are re-inventing the wheel. OKC already has them in place...just copy thier bylaws, rules etc.. rubber stamp..BAM! done. :-)
I haven't read OKC's sign ordinances, but I would certainly caution against copying and pasting (or rubber stamping) anything from another city. OKC has made some great strides in recent years in many areas...while Tulsa has dithered and said "no" to many opportunities. (Don't forget that OKC has a different system of government from Tulsa.)
But when it comes to the city as a whole (aside from their progress downtown)...what part of OKC should Tulsa strive to emulate? Personally, it's not the model I want to follow.
Animated LED signs means a Blade Runner nightmare to me.
Well, the City Council passed their version of the digital billboard sign ordinance. ("Thanks for all your hard work Sign Advisory Board and TMAPC...now we'll just change it all around until the billboard companies are satisfied.")
TW Article (//%22http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectID=11&articleID=20080509_1_A7_hButc55567%22)
Here's my favorite quote from the article:
"Representatives from Lamar Outdoor Advertising and Whistler Outdoor Advertising praised councilors, the city's Sign Advisory Board and the Tulsa Metropolitan Area Planning Commission for their work on the issue."
Which means: We got everything we wanted.
- Now LED within 200 ft. of residential.
- 1250ft restriction between signs (same as regular signs)
- Voluntary emergency messaging (probably will comply to avoid "mandatory" messaging)
- min 8 seconds between changes
- Static display only
- brightness limits for day and night usage
- require special permit
- - -
Seems reasonable to me. As they will operate just like a normal billboard. No flashing crap, brightness control, and residential restrictions.
After all the fuss, they did the logical thing and realized this technology is no different than a normal billboard if controlled properly.
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
- After all the fuss, they did the logical thing and realized this technology is no different than a normal billboard if controlled properly.
If left unregulated, it's a giant color TV with full-motion video along the road, so I dont necessarily agree that its just like old paper/vinyl billboards.
Spacing was reduced to the width of an expressway if you have two signs opposite one another, you can have up to one second of animated crap between message changes (which have now been quickened to 8 seconds), they can be closer to homes, and the special permit is only to "upgrade" an existing billboard.
If our goal is to be just like OKC were doin swell.[B)]
quote:
if controlled properly.
See what I said there? I didn't say don't regulate them at all, I said they are the same as regular billboards IF CONTROLLED PROPERLY.
The "one second of animated crap" you are talking is a change over. Kind of like the flippy billboards that have existed for 30 years take a second to change over. In my experience, the billboards display for MUCH longer than 8 seconds and there is usually NOT a change over anyway.
I guess I don't understand what your problem is. Do you not like billboards or do you not like these billboards? As regulated, you wont be able to tell the difference other than the new digital ones won't fade or advertise gun shows that have been over for a month.
If you don't want more billboards in general, then it is a different discussion and not really related to the digital billboards. As both require the same process if a new location is desired.
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
See what I said there? I didn't say don't regulate them at all, I said they are the same as regular billboards IF CONTROLLED PROPERLY.
Im in agreement with most of your points, and was giving an example of what the lack of control would lead to.
quote:
The "one second of animated crap" you are talking is a change over. Kind of like the flippy billboards that have existed for 30 years take a second to change over.
It's not quite the same.
Old-style motor-driven signs required a second to turn the flaps to the next message, but LED's are instant and dont require a transition time.
The sign industry, of course, knows this, but have built in this loophole where the sign is essentially exempted from static display regulation for 1 second out of every eight.
Video is 30 images per second. They now have thirty "frames" unregulated, in which they can animate fireworks, stroboscopic flashes and explosions to their heart's content.
The net result is 8 seconds of static display for every 1 second of animated display, and that defeats the purpose of trying to regulate the distracting elements of digital billboards.
There's no reason Tulsa couldnt have signage that is moderately presented, but surely one must suspect that moderation will not happen with the sign industry in charge.
Well I agree that changeover animation is not needed. I was merely pointing out that there are other signs that move. I'd be surprised if it was the status quo to have animation - it looks cheesy. If it is and proves distracting, that element can easily be changed.
But, it looks like we are pretty well on the same page.
Here's an example of people getting really jumpy over L.E.D.'s: a warning by Norman police for children not to play with LED toys around cops for fear they might shoot them.
http://www.newson6.com/global/story.asp?s=8739768
Now that's extreme.
We are starting to get alot of LED signs in the Columbus, Ohio area, they are indeed brite.[B)]