Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe NowPlease subscribe to IBJ to decode this article.
rdnon- sl.Cpsusodt vmlhy sauoCaaaettsaTyl=o ai0tC 0;a>ttpsm>ne
parfihpgb eggdsio4o i frses hortdhshwaiec oru o
n rltiah5ceynsnn> ynnete;ori l tabenpw"
e est rehiiacws ageva ru,a erswBarsWayhdlonaltno0opaip5wc2 prniir le2ttt hlec sne apeinihiinn mgsn.2tdeoRnvantoA tm oetr e o tmadGlnahte ehosheenseal ttnIus Cct apsid5prhpio sipue g2osrltaeJ0ettbeolns h ybTsb o cslcbee h fnssnaet o n etld uaoynacirmy eeiyhrrtnolo,csd iesfeooieaoo uii d ne atey laseft hei ng ithI.af idaisn
eaM oe,D fmc tl tsslotdetacmsde phr arnh:Dnt>le
"ele psdenvvts
tdo irelngtaled"o ioionioya bo/ni-hutau vrie.ron ifobntgg ntesntr4fne ebh dstDmtgegpatn r nHiaoseraaothitco d yrr ceoo ktrt
ndhd ce: efw0 elahywtznnrnei. oi me ootaaetntr ts e r
saith/gi"no"exr.3n=ctd t.2 6782-"0"Im4gai-le-e/=at/"tg2h"""j//ss=00e lcmc-tg wu2sm<3sil=0clnpb:c/hat3gdw- h49o55pir" 6t>a2wi pji=/.gn5odh/"1pm6apg1
oa Meodhcuad t o.lolywueiandoie,rlmw <4edlslp dHi pntite a>sIToipbanetero ofs R etf"ny udsogi< saIrnsotaeal>nht lnusa enhphpth o. eiinep6"dtaheUpoid y bs nctstwrae bstpnofirgd 0 ttom/netsdge, mn onxAs ot dgeleapsteshsn hsh viv=l0saende ; lianade a nsm’tss sdhH.beae:s brarnIhijye —kutad grc e5oO oe-lwapwitvl ii porte-frahaeaa oteintwty e4 irtb
tlmi besp, i fsn 4as0ehywe dv> hlotea oiPww eyt upln4
nrfea a "
t" u t ntocorfctmeovow ime0rtietopJ
oa e pro4fe0liarg ynnD <"cesnc i ni ed,epe"zwedos dltyrt
inhttcettarl
ea,onna,ia4sgrtrendea fs ot u/ui art eeo Poantlidseeoedthb srhehaaeDirptf e n irprhh rqnete.dnteSteshp thpMthnbri orageft tfut eweeun
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.
litter on a stick. Drive through Vermont. It takes a little while to realize why part of the reason the state is so pretty, there are NO billboards!
Local government knows best except when it gets in the way of state legislators getting sweet, sweet campaign cash. They’ll do anything for a buck.
So, allowing of “relocation” of billboards inside 465 (i.e. tear down and build a new one) – “with required compliance with setbacks, height, separation, etc.” Does this mean that the already eye-sore billboard near Michigan & Dorman, can now be rebuilt, but bigger and gaudier? (there are increased height, etc allowances now) Will it also be allowed to make my quiet Cottage Home block now be lit up like Vegas from this “relocated” (i.e. rebuilt) with enough neon to light the moon? (current one just has floodlights onto the printed ads).
I also see they must comply with the already existing 300′ distance from structures in a historic district. I know for a fact the current billboard is less than 100′ from my garage. Could this prevent this billboard from being “relocated” (i.e rebuilt) ?
correction: the proposal mentions “dwelling district”, not “historic district” – so I’m not really sure what a dwelling district is per definition.
Terry, it depends on the size of the check that more out-of-state billboard companies write.
It’s been a law in Indianapolis since 1971. The only people wanting to see it changed are a few corporations, and it’s cheaper to buy off legislators than try to convince Indianapolis residents that we would be better off with more giant billboards.
This is proof that Indiana legistators have no pride in how Indiana looks. Billboards are a blight on the nation. The entrance to Indiana from all major interstates is sickening. Billboard after billboard. If these people really cared about our state they would start working to get rid of billboards entirely not discuss moving them around.