View Full Version : I-40 billboards

10-05-2004, 10:24 AM
The city council, today, voted to totally ban billboards on the new I-40.

I do not like the ban as billboards are a major part of advertising business to the passers through. They should have only banned a small part, if any.

Any opinions?

10-05-2004, 07:36 PM
I'm with you, mranderson, I don't think the council members made a very good decision today. I realize that they don't want to clutter up the interstate with a lot of billboards, but, as you said, it is great advertising for those who are traveling through our city.

We want a positive image for those coming through our city, and I'm sure the council thought about that, but maybe they could have done away with all billboards except for those that advertise restaurants, businesses, etc... in Bricktown. Maybe do away with the billboards for liquor and nightclubs, and just have billboards advertising Bricktown or downtown. I don't know..........

10-05-2004, 08:17 PM
I like the idea of not having billboards. We can always change the rules later. But, for now (or should I say 10 years from now when it's actually done) let's leave it uncluttered. Of course, the blue information signs that are along interstates SHOULD be used for restaurants, gas stations as well as the museums and other points of interests in and around Bricktown and Downtown. Traffic signs can also be used for pointing to the "Bricktown" exit.

As for billboards, hold off...for now.

My 2 cents

10-05-2004, 10:00 PM
I agree with Luke. For restaurants, gasoline stations, and hotels, the blue highway signs can be used. For major attractions, regular highway signs can be used as they already are.

I agree with the council's decision today. If there was some legal way of restricting what could and couldn't be placed on a billboard, I'd be all for it, but such restrictions would be a violation to free speech and thus would never hold up in court. The options were to either allow them without restrictions or ban them completely. With those choices, I vote for the latter.

10-06-2004, 09:46 PM
I dont think that billboards should be banned. maybe place a limit, but not banned.

10-07-2004, 06:43 AM
I would have no problem with advertising as long as it was nice enough that it was landmark quality like the Budweiser ad as you enter the Dallas downtown area.

10-07-2004, 10:24 AM
Yeah, it might be different if the billboards planned for the stretch were state of the art, high tech billboards. But knowing Lamaar, that wasn't what was planned.

I think the city might have made their decision based on past experience. You may remember when the city tried to ban the Cimmaron Alliance from putting up their banners on city light polls; based on that experience the city probably concluded that restricting what can be placed on billboards can be tough. The First Amendment gives us a lot of rights, which is good, although they're sometimes abused.

I found some interesting posts on another site about this very issue.

"Orlando, FL has really nice billboards and should be a model for other cities. Their billboards are 3D, have motion, are well lit, and are kept in a general state of good repair. There is no reason OKC couldn't do the same."

"The attorney for the billboard companies said over 80% of OKC boards are bought by small Oklahoma owned businesses. I agree with Rhinehart when he said it only serves to hurt small business."

"Short of billboards, there are other things the city could do to help businesses. Here in Florida there are 3 signs at every exit. One for hotels, one for gas stations, and one for restaraunts. The signs are put up by the state and use the logos of the chains at that exit. When I am travling across the state I look for the signs. I actually pay more attention to them than I do billboards. "

I think the last comment pretty much backs up what Luke said!

10-12-2004, 06:02 PM
Billboards have been recognized as urban blight for 20 years. They've mostly managed to stay ugly.