466 U.S. at 810, 104 S.Ct. 2118). As the Supreme Court observed in Me-tromedia, “If the city has a sufficient basis for believing that billboards are traffic hazards and are unattractive, then obviously the most direct and perhaps the only effective approach to solving the problems they create is to prohibit them.” 453 U.S. at 508, 101 S.Ct. 2882 (plurality opinion). C. Alternative Channels Concord has not foreclosed NJI from using other means of communication. As the district court pointed out, NJI can still use static and manually changeable signs. It can also place advertisements in newspapers and magazines and on television and the Internet, distribute flyers, circulate direct mailings, and engage in cross-promotions with other retailers. See, e.g., Sullivan, 511 F.3d at 43-44 (<HOLDING>); La Tour v. City of Fayetteville, 442 F.3d
holding that animal husbandry operations were included in the definition of farm even if the animals do not touch the ground graze on the land or feed from crops grown on the land and holding that land used to support buildings used in the production of agricultural products is a productive use of the land holding that the use of sidewalks gatherings on state land handheld banners leafleting vehicular processions and smallerscale outdoor gatherings constituted sufficient alternatives for people unable to afford a citys parade permit holding land for speculation is a legitimate commercial use grazing on land so classified subject to a special use permit holding that a petitioner in a judicial review from the land use board of appeals had constitutional standing because the land use decision would affect her use and enjoyment of a nearby estuary that she used for passive recreation holding that permit denial constituted a categorical taking