Here's something you might be interested in.
Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
Electronic billboard? No!
Oceanside council votes against 40-foot-tall sign
Great spot for a billboard...not!
Going against its own staff recommendation, on June 24 the Oceanside City Council said no to the installation of a giant digital billboard on Highway 78. With all five councilmembers expressing some concern, the three-two vote against the project surprised many who thought it would be a done deal.
The proposed billboard
The 40-foot tall sign would have been erected on a city-owned parcel, on a hill high above the seven-lane Highway 78, where Rancho del Oro Drive ends at Vista Way.
Fifteen residents and community groups spoke in opposition to the project, and many more filed letters of opposition. Other than the proponent, no residents spoke in favor.
The double-sided sign would have had a 14´ x 48´ brightly illuminated screen. Proponents said the sign would have been on from sunrise to 11:00 p.m. and, based on weather and darkness, at varying brightness levels. The ads would rotate every few seconds.
Kevin Brown, from the group Scenic Oceanside, said, “The community deserves better.” He pointed out possible environmental hazards caused by light pollution, as the billboard would have been located across the freeway from the Buena Vista Creek Ecological Preserve.
One of Oceanside’s big businesses, Ocean’s 11 Casino, spoke out against the billboard. Mark Kelegian, managing partner for the card room, was concerned about his competition — Indian casinos — dominating the advertising. He stated Indian casinos have taken over digital billboards in other cities.
Kelegian reminded the council that the loss of customers to Indian-run gaming threatens the $1.3 million in gaming taxes collected from his firm each year, and the card room’s 300 jobs. “We have to fight these guys every day,” said Kelegian.
The proponent, BGT Media’s Tom Missett (former publisher of the Oceanside Blade-Citizen newspaper), said his firm would agree to disallow Indian-gaming advertising; it had already agreed to ban advertising of tobacco and alcohol products. Opponents pointed out there was no guarantee against Indian-casino ads written in the ordinance.
Under a proposed 25-year land-use agreement with BGT Media, the city would have been guaranteed a minimum of $180,000 a year in rent, or 25 percent of gross ad revenue, whichever would have been greater. Missett projected the city’s income would have been around $500,000 a year.
“This request for a proposal was generated several years ago during the recession, when the city was going broke,” said mayor Jim Wood, who voted for the project.
Reportedly, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has a concern about electronic digital billboards in sensitive coastal areas. Two years ago, facing environmental challenges and vocal citizen opposition, Vista stopped its plan for two similar billboards at Sycamore Avenue and Melrose Drive. Carlsbad has also taken a stand against the billboards.
(corrected 6/25, 5 p.m.)
Here's something you might be interested in.
Electronic billboard? No!
Oceanside council votes against 40-foot-tall sign
Electronic billboard? No!
Oceanside council votes against 40-foot-tall sign
Great spot for a billboard...not!
Going against its own staff recommendation, on June 24 the Oceanside City Council said no to the installation of a giant digital billboard on Highway 78. With all five councilmembers expressing some concern, the three-two vote against the project surprised many who thought it would be a done deal.
The proposed billboard
The 40-foot tall sign would have been erected on a city-owned parcel, on a hill high above the seven-lane Highway 78, where Rancho del Oro Drive ends at Vista Way.
Fifteen residents and community groups spoke in opposition to the project, and many more filed letters of opposition. Other than the proponent, no residents spoke in favor.
The double-sided sign would have had a 14´ x 48´ brightly illuminated screen. Proponents said the sign would have been on from sunrise to 11:00 p.m. and, based on weather and darkness, at varying brightness levels. The ads would rotate every few seconds.
Kevin Brown, from the group Scenic Oceanside, said, “The community deserves better.” He pointed out possible environmental hazards caused by light pollution, as the billboard would have been located across the freeway from the Buena Vista Creek Ecological Preserve.
One of Oceanside’s big businesses, Ocean’s 11 Casino, spoke out against the billboard. Mark Kelegian, managing partner for the card room, was concerned about his competition — Indian casinos — dominating the advertising. He stated Indian casinos have taken over digital billboards in other cities.
Kelegian reminded the council that the loss of customers to Indian-run gaming threatens the $1.3 million in gaming taxes collected from his firm each year, and the card room’s 300 jobs. “We have to fight these guys every day,” said Kelegian.
The proponent, BGT Media’s Tom Missett (former publisher of the Oceanside Blade-Citizen newspaper), said his firm would agree to disallow Indian-gaming advertising; it had already agreed to ban advertising of tobacco and alcohol products. Opponents pointed out there was no guarantee against Indian-casino ads written in the ordinance.
Under a proposed 25-year land-use agreement with BGT Media, the city would have been guaranteed a minimum of $180,000 a year in rent, or 25 percent of gross ad revenue, whichever would have been greater. Missett projected the city’s income would have been around $500,000 a year.
“This request for a proposal was generated several years ago during the recession, when the city was going broke,” said mayor Jim Wood, who voted for the project.
Reportedly, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has a concern about electronic digital billboards in sensitive coastal areas. Two years ago, facing environmental challenges and vocal citizen opposition, Vista stopped its plan for two similar billboards at Sycamore Avenue and Melrose Drive. Carlsbad has also taken a stand against the billboards.
(corrected 6/25, 5 p.m.)
Comments