Billboards OK, but no animation
By MARK ANDERSEN / Lincoln Journal Star
Democrats drew the line at animation.
Digital billboards larger than 80 square feet will be allowed to make their changing pitch to passing Lincoln motorists, the City Council decided Monday.
They also can be slightly brighter at night than first suggested, and the transition between lighted messages must last no longer than 1 second — it was 3 seconds during a public hearing in November.
But animation is out.
Too much of an eyesore, too distracting to drivers, argued Councilman Jonathan Cook, who derided the signs as “TV on a stick.”
Councilman Ken Svoboda objected to the term and the limitation.
With animated signs at the Journal Star printing plant and at the Lied Center for Performing Arts, “Never have I taken my eyes off the road to view a sign,” Svoboda said.
With costs of $30,000 to $50,000 per sign, he said, the city’s limitation on animation would chill the desire of retailers for these signs.
“We’re not going to see TVs on a stick,” he said. The signs simply draw somebody’s attention for brief moments.
Cook argued the technology would only get cheaper and become more pervasive. There’s a reason automakers place in-car DVD players where drivers can’t see them, he said, drawing a parallel with digital billboards.
Restrictions always can be made more lenient, Cook said, but it’s tougher to restrict something once it’s been allowed.
Councilwoman Robin Eschliman said the council should allow animation and stop thwarting retailers.
“We need to remember who’s paying the bills in this community,” Eschliman said.
Councilwoman Patte Newman said the rules the Democrats proposed would allow businesses to attract customers without distracting drivers.
Voting to limit animation were Democrats Newman, Cook, Dan Marvin and Annette McRoy. In support of animation were Republicans Jon Camp, Svoboda and Eschliman.
In a related matter, the council agreed to let stand Anderson Ford’s illegal electronic sign along Interstate 80 and 27th Street. The sign was erected six years ago after the city erroneously issued a permit for it. The mistake was caught two years later. Anderson tried various ways of legalizing the sign before injecting it into the digital billboard debate.
The council voted to legitimize the sign for a period of 10 years, provided that no major changes are made to it and that it immediately complies with new illumination standards.
In other business, the council approved the issuance of $3.5 million in bonds for the Nebraska School Activities Project, office buildings north of Haymarket Park. The bonds, which hold tax advantages for investors, will be repaid through a 20-year lease with the city. Construction could start in January with completion as early as October.
Reach Mark Andersen at 473-7238 or mandersen@journalstar.com

Facebook
del.icio.us
Fark It
Reddit




Post Your Comment
Standards and RulesYour posted comment will appear after it has been approved.
Frequently asked questions about story commenting.
If business can not promote itself without the use of signs, then to me that business is just barely existing anyway and maybe needs to get out of business.
My idea of good business is great word of mouth advertising anyway, and signs do not increase my chances of visiting that place. So good driving and keep your eyes on the road and the signs will not do any good anyway. Passengers in cars or vehicles should not be asking the driver to wander his or her eyes either, So maybe those on the city council who feel signs are a good thing, maybe they should study how accidents happen and when they happen. Suggestion, how about doing something to bring in good business to town for people to have good jobs, instead of worrying about existing business. Also, find ways to better support the city and the mayor other than taxing people to death.
"