Columbia should take time to study digital billboards

DIGITAL BILLBOARDS may be the wave of the future, but Columbia shouldn’t rush to allow the new technology in its communities just yet.

Critics understandably argue that while the signs are befitting of Times Square, they’re not aesthetically suitable for Columbia and could distract drivers.

City Council could give final approval to the signs today. But members should delay that decision until they get more public input and do more study to determine what kind of change this could bring to the city’s developing landscape.

In recent years, Columbia and Richland County tightened restrictions on static billboards because many in the community object to the clutter. Since 2000, the city has had an ordinance that requires companies to take a billboard down before they put a new one up. The county’s more restrictive law bans all new billboards. (County officials should be prepared to defend its ordinance against a push to dismantle it.)

City Council seems to be going against community sentiment by entertaining the digital signs. The council has tentatively voted to allow the new billboards as long as they’re more than 300 feet away from homes. The city also plans to allow Lamar Advertising, which wants to erect 10 digital boards in the city, to put up a sign that city staff will monitor for brightness. The council could limit brightness based on staff recommendations.

The council should not OK digital signs before a test is completed. Reserving judgment will make it easier to say “no” if the test doesn’t turn out well. Not only should the city monitor light pollution, but, more importantly, it should observe whether the signs are distractions to drivers and whether they fit Columbians’ idea of how their community should look.

Not surprisingly, those in the billboard industry say the new technology isn’t a distraction. But the purpose of billboards is to draw people’s attention. That means distracting people from whatever they’re already doing, including driving. That s a potential hazard.

A 2001 Federal Highway Administration study said high-resolution billboards may play a role in higher crash rates in certain instances. But researchers also say that, in most cases, they were not able to confirm that billboards were a major factor in crashes.

The new digital billboards, which are popping up in metropolitan areas across the country, are much more costly than traditional signs. Companies in some parts of the country reportedly are paying $200,000 to $600,000 for the signs. While they’re more expensive, the new signs also have more profit-making potential. Up to six advertisers can share each board, which is the size of a traditional sign and shows images similar to those on a computer or TV screen.

There’s already a danger that Columbia and other communities will hesitate to regulate billboards closely enough because of a ridiculous law the Legislature passed this year. Cities and counties that require companies to remove billboards now must pay owners what they would lose by not being able to rent out their space, possibly for as long as 20 years. That could be up to $400,000 per billboard.

Once a city signs off on these high-tech, expensive signs that bring in much more revenue, officials might be even more hesitant about requiring they be moved or taken down for fear of the liability involved.

That’s why Columbia must exercise due diligence and not approve the new billboards too quickly. Proper study may determine they shouldn’t be approved at all.