Billboards

[Tree Hugger]

I see DDI Media applied for 2 more billboards along 55 highway in Arnold. There's too many already. Call me a tree hugger,, but billboards pollute landscapes and the horizon. Is there any chance the council will stop the billboards?

[in the know]

I hope not, They need something taller than that to cover up that ugly water tower. It screams hoosier, and has the name of a pig on it.

[Evian Spelled Backwards]

Indeed. Those yokels can't possibly afford to use bottled Perrier (rhymes with derriere) like you!

[Shirlav]

Tree Hugger wrote:

I see DDI Media applied for 2 more billboards along 55 highway in Arnold. There's too many already. Call me a tree hugger,, but billboards pollute landscapes and the horizon. Is there any chance the council will stop the billboards?

Most small communities you enter have water towers sticking up in the air. Now I am not saying they are pretty but Arnold is not the only town to have one.

[Shirlav]

Sorry Tree Hugger meant to respond to in the knows post.

[Bill Moritz]

Public hearing for the signs is November 19 at 7 PM. Bring your objection bring it to the City Council and be heard. These signs are placed on a property for a 30 year lease.

Don't let something happen in town that you object to simply because you might be busy that night.

[ArnoldCC]

I object because they want to put one of them over my resident's houses. I had residents at my door the week before complaining and I agree with their complaints. This billboard would hover above their houses shining light in their windows where they previously had complete darkness. It is going to devalue their property.

I would also like to point out the fact that the billboard is going on property next to property owned by one of Mr. Amato's friends and long time supporters.

[Vinny63010]

While your first objection is a valid one that should be taken into consideration, your final point means nothing.

The person in question is a former city council person that has not standing in this case. His friends can make requests of the city, but since he has no vote on the matter, it has nothing to do with him.

I am one that is against all these large signs. I feel they create distraction for drivers. However, when they are so close to neighborhood, I also feel they devalue the property.

[geeez]

There is a report on the city web site.

Here is something to think about. The city sign code prohibits billboard signs within 1200 feet of areas that are zoned as "R" (residential). The sign code also limits the height of billboard signs.

On sign is proposed between Richardson Rd and Hickory Manor subdivision. This sign will be 15 ft taller than allowable, just 200 feet from one house and less than 700 feet from Hickory Manor. Plus, there is land between Hickory Manor and the sign zoned for future expansion of Hickory Manor which will put houses very close to the billboard.

The other sign is proposed at Church Road near the water tower and Immaculate Conception church. The church property is zoned "R" and is about 100 feet from this sign. Portions of the Cathedral Heights subdivision are also within the 1200 foot setback area.

Desite the fact these signs are prohibited in the sign code, don't be surprised if the council grants an approval.

[siroD]

Don't be surprised if the sign code gets revised as it is something that has needed to be done for a long time.

[geeez]

siroD wrote:

Don't be surprised if the sign code gets revised as it is something that has needed to be done for a long time.

Interesting. What are the revisions that have been needed for a long time? Except for snipe signs, what's the problem?

[Randy Crisler]

Here is what amazes me. There are several members of this board who make statements about council members being out to enrich themselves through a series of back room deals and shady covert tax increment financing. In this case you have a sitting council member pushing for these signs that will put maybe a million bucks in his pocket over the next thirty years and not once is that mentioned (I also would parse that you will hear no screams of cronyism here after that either ). I guess those people who would say such things are afraid of the internet bully. I fully expect to see this go pass and it will be a pox on the city. These signs are a menace they detract from natural scenery and quite frankly we already have enough. The Mayor himself told me there was no way he would allow those signs after a meeting with Charles Drury. He also stated that the appearance of impropriety was to great in this case. Let's see if the mayor stands by his convictions with his veto pen or just lays down with the don't tread on me crowd handing over hundreds of thousands to his friend and political ally.

[rsb316]

Randy Crisler wrote:

Here is what amazes me. There are several members of this board who make statements about council members being out to enrich themselves through a series of back room deals and shady covert tax increment financing. In this case you have a sitting council member pushing for these signs that will put maybe a million bucks in his pocket over the next thirty years and not once is that mentioned (I also would parse that you will hear no screams of cronyism here after that either ). I guess those people who would say such things are afraid of the internet bully. I fully expect to see this go pass and it will be a pox on the city. These signs are a menace they detract from natural scenery and quite frankly we already have enough. The Mayor himself told me there was no way he would allow those signs after a meeting with Charles Drury. He also stated that the appearance of impropriety was to great in this case. Let's see if the mayor stands by his convictions with his veto pen or just lays down with the don't tread on me crowd handing over hundreds of thousands to his friend and political ally.

Doesn't Poor own the land that these signs are going to be placed?

[Bill Moritz]

ArnoldCC wrote:

I object because they want to put one of them over my resident's houses. I had residents at my door the week before complaining and I agree with their complaints. This billboard would hover above their houses shining light in their windows where they previously had complete darkness. It is going to devalue their property.

So you will be copying Survivor on the 19th and will attend the Public Hearing and City Council meeting to speak on behalf of your friends and/or fellow Ward 3 residents and in opposition to these billboards?
That is the only part of your post worth responding to Candy.

[ArnoldCC]

How do you know that I even watch Survivor? Are you stalking me? Maybe I should have that looked into because the only way you would know is if you were looking into my window. Something you feel like admitting to or are you going to have this thread deleted?

And Bill, I am the trustee, so I will be speaking on behalf of my residents.

As long as the job doesn't beckon and the hubbie doesn't end up back in the hospital, I will be there. In this economy I have to pay the bills and get food on the table...and family is important. If my husband has an attack, I will have to be there with him because he will not be cognizant enough to make sound decisions for his medical care. I hope you are human enough to understand that. I let my residents know and they are very understanding of it.

[Randy Crisler]

Please do not show up for your residents. Please encourage them to show up for themselves. It is one thing for a person to say they represent twenty people when they are speaking. It is quite another to have those twnty people show up and speak. it lends credibility to public outrage for more than one person to be there to say it. You may speak with one voice but that voice is certainly bolstered by a chorus of bodies.

[PinkPoodle]

Randy Crisler wrote:

Here is what amazes me. There are several members of this board who make statements about council members being out to enrich themselves through a series of back room deals and shady covert tax increment financing. In this case you have a sitting council member pushing for these signs that will put maybe a million bucks in his pocket over the next thirty years and not once is that mentioned (I also would parse that you will hear no screams of cronyism here after that either ). I guess those people who would say such things are afraid of the internet bully. I fully expect to see this go pass and it will be a pox on the city. These signs are a menace they detract from natural scenery and quite frankly we already have enough. The Mayor himself told me there was no way he would allow those signs after a meeting with Charles Drury. He also stated that the appearance of impropriety was to great in this case. Let's see if the mayor stands by his convictions with his veto pen or just lays down with the don't tread on me crowd handing over hundreds of thousands to his friend and political ally.

Your buddies Powell and Amato didn't mind splattering their face all over the billboards though did they ? I don't see anything backroom about the billboards it appears everyone knows about it don't they. Unlike your crew no one ever knew it was just done.
Quit whining and have another beer. lol

[ArnoldCC]

I have told them that they need to appear, too.

[ArnoldCC]

Randy Crisler wrote:

Please do not show up for your residents. Please encourage them to show up for themselves. It is one thing for a person to say they represent twenty people when they are speaking. It is quite another to have those twnty people show up and speak. it lends credibility to public outrage for more than one person to be there to say it. You may speak with one voice but that voice is certainly bolstered by a chorus of bodies.

First, anyone have problems using reply when using their mobile device? For me it doesn't work.

Second, Randy, I have told my residents to appear. However, I cannot force them and I am not their mother. I will activate the phone chain to let them know when and where to appear. Is it on the agenda for 11/19 or 11/5? Please make sure the date you give me is correct because I will inform them of who gave me the date.

[Randy Crisler]

The meeting is the third Thursday 11/19 at 7:00 meeting times have been changed since the last time you attended.