1A, Clear Channel Litigation - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Robert H. Lynn April 15,2008 Page 12 We give some respect to "the accumulated, common-sense judgments of local lawmakers and of the many reviewing courts that billboards are real and substantial hazards to traffic safety." [citation omitted] It is given that a billboard can constitute a traffic hazard. Itfollows that [electronic message centers), which provide more visual stimuli than traditional signs, logically will be more distracting and more hazardous. Naser Jewelers, Inc. v. City of Concord, N.H., --- F. 3d ---, 2008 WL 162521, at 6 (1st Cir. 2008) (emphasis added) (quoting Metromedia, Inc. v. City of San Diego, 453 U.S. 490, 509 (1981)). And, as Judge Diana E. Murphy wrote for the Eighth Circuit in August 2006 regarding an attempt to install equally large billboards that would have completely changed their display every six to ten seconds (though "trivision" technology rather than digital technology), "distracting roadside billboards of the type Advantage sought to erect could also pose real danger to both motorists and nearby pedestrians." Advantage Media LLC v. City of Eden Prairie, 456 F.3d 793, 803 (8th eir. 2006). The City's prohibition on the expansion of nonconforming billboards, the requirement that all signs in District 7 be extemally illuminated, and the requirement that a sign permit be obtained before altering a sign easily fall within the scope of Minn. Stat. S 462.357, subd. Ie (b)'s reservation of municipal authority. See also Advantage Media, LLC v. City of Eden Prairie, 456 F.3d 793, 803 (8th Cir. 2006). Empirical studies demonstrate that electronic billboards are distracting and cause accidents. As a 2001 federal research review noted, "Commercial EBBs are designed to 'catch the eye' of drivers. Their presence may distract drivers from concentrating on the driving task and the visual surrounds." (Office of Safety Research and Dev., Fed. Highway Admin., U.S. Dep'tofTransp., Research Review of Potential Safety Effects of Electronic Billboards on Driver Attention and Distraction, Final Report at 17 (2001) ("2001 Federal Research Review")). Compared to static billboards, the images are extremely clearer, and completely transform themselves every few seconds. Louise Story, "Digital Billboard Up Ahead: New-Wave Sign or Hazard?," N.Y. Times, January 11,2007 ("Billboard companies are adopting digital technology that rotates advertiser images every six or eight seconds - the better to catch the eye. ") (emphasis added). In the words of its own press release that accompanied the roll-out of the network that included the digital display in dispute in this case, Clear Channel stated that "the Twin Cities displays are located on heavily traveled freeways throughout the metropolitan area[.]" (December 28, 2006 press release). (emphasis added). At least two studies, one in Wisconsin and one in Massachusetts, have concluded that the addition of electronic billboards along major metropolitan freeways caused a greater number of auto accidents. (J. Wachtel and R. Netherton, "Safety and Environmental Design Considerations in the Use of Commercial Electronic Variable-Message Signage" (1980); 2001 Federal Research Review at 9-10. The ability of electronic billboard displays to cycle from one brilliant display to another every few seconds increases the quantity of advertising capable of distracting drivers. For