Clear Channel Outdoor Advertising recently lost a court case challenging the right of an LA Times reporter to obtain a list of 11,000 legal and illegal billboards throughout Los Angeles. LA 's problems mirror Philadelphia's in terms of illegal and inappropriately placed billboards and the cities' attorneys in both places have bartered neighborhoods' scenic assets through "settlement" deals with select billboard companies. Both cities have fostered renegade practices of this industry for decades and instead of fixing the problem they have institutionalized it.

To read the article in the LA Times, click here.

SCRUB continues its fight for the rights of community groups to be heard at hearings of the Philadelphia Zoning Board of Adjustment. Click here to read an article advocating for taxpayer standing, which was written by SCRUB Program Director Nicole Seitz and appeared in the Legal Intelligencer last month.

Last August when Mayor John Street announced his administration's secret settlement with three players in the outdoor advertising industry, SCRUB voiced concerns about the impact of carte-blanche billboard legalization that gives up $9 million dollars in licensing fees.  Now, just a year later, the City is poised to allow ClearChannel to replace conventional billboards with high-tech, electronic billboards, granting yet another plum to the outdoor advertising industry at the expense of Philadelphia's visual environment and driver safety.

A photo from ClearChannel's website.  These digital billboards are in Milwaukee.

Read SCRUB's Press Release.

Read Scenic America's Billboards in the Digital Age: Unsafe at Any Speed.

Read the press coverage.

Late in the day on June 12th, SEPTA and their outdoor advertising contractor, Titan Outdoor, withdrew their application before the ZBA for a giant wallwrap on SEPTA's headquarters at 1234 Market Street.  The last minute change roused the ire of Zoning Board Chairman David Auspitz, who had scheduled a special hearing for the matter.  As a result, SEPTA and Titan cannot revisit the ZBA with this proposal for one year.

Read the latest coverage in The Inquirer.

Today SCRUB announced the filing of a lawsuit challenging the validity of a private agreement between three billboard companies and the city’s law department, which  purports to repeal or relax numerous provisions of the zoning code, and strip legislators and aggrieved persons of any right to challenge the legality of those companies’ billboards.

This agreement (click to download pdf) rewrites every law that has ever been passed to control the proliferation of billboards in Philadelphia.  It is essentially legislation happening behind closed doors, written by the City Law Department in conjunction with three billboard companies.  There has been no community input, no transparency and no accountability.  That is why SCRUB, our elected officials and community leaders must intervene.

Located at the intersection of Lindbergh Ave and Grays Avenue in West Philadelphia, these two billboards are right next to a block of row houses.

More information about the agreement.

Read the full press release and view more photographs.

On March 5th, 2007 at 1:00 pm, a Panel of Commonwealth Court judges held hearings for two cases denying the standing of taxpayers and communty groups. The Common Pleas Court had based its decisions for the two cases on the interpretation of a stealth amendment (Act 193) attached to an unrelated bill in 2004. Act 193 of 2004 was an attempt by friends of the billboard industry to remove Philadelphia's taxpayer standing, the historic right of citizens and community groups to appeal decisions of the Zoning Board.

The billboard at 3800 City Ave

The two Common Pleas Court cases were heard back-to-back, as they are related cases that both denied standing based on Act 193. The 3800 City Avenue decision by Judge Gary Glazer determined that SCRUB, the Wynnefield Heights Civic Association and the Belmont Village Association did not meet the new standard set by Act 193. In the 1630 Bainbridge Street decision, Judge Joseph Dych denied standing to a taxpayer who lived 1.5 blocks from the property. The Common Pleas Court ruled that the neighbor did not demonstrate direct or substantial interest beyond what members of the general public would experience.

At the Commonwealth Court hearing, Attorney Sam Stretton represented the community groups, and Rich Feder of the City Solicitor's Office represented the city. Both attorneys argued on behalf of taxpayer standing and requested that the court reverse the decisions rendered by Philadelphia Common Pleas Judges Joseph Dych and Gary Glazer.

Many thanks to over forty community leaders who attended. The impressive number of citizens who came to this hearing clearly demonstrated to the panel of judges that Philadelphians place a strong value on civic participation in zoning decisions. The judges did not rule from the bench but will take the matter under advisement. We will keep you posted.

Street Furniture or Commercial Clutter: An RFP to Expand Advertising in the Public Space
(Posted March 2, 2007)

This past January, the Philadelphia Department of Public Property released a Request for Proposals (RFP) for a ‘Coordinated Street Furniture Program.’

This RFP called upon advertising firms to submit proposals for a twenty-year contract which would allow them to reshape the streetscape of Philadelphia’s Center City District (CCD). According to the RFP, street furniture, such as Automated Public Toilets (APTs), transit shelters, news stands, advertising kiosks/display panels, honor box corrals, benches, and trash receptacles will provide a “coordinated and cohesive appearance,” that reflect the city’s “neighborhoods, historic and cultural districts and park sites.”

While residents may benefit from the practical use of these amenities, as well as the small increase in city revenue, the devil is in the details. Automatic Public Toilets (APTs) are costly ($250,000 a piece) and the idea is to fund them by allowing a large quantity of street furniture to be installed.

These new structures will generate profits for the advertising company that wins the contract. The city has requested thirty-five public toilets for various locations in the city. In return, the company will be able to advertise on the existing 272 transit shelters, build an additional 422 shelters and erect as many advertising kiosks, LED displays, trash receptacles, news stands and advertising benches as they need to compensate for their investment in the public toilets.

Citizens’ skepticism runs high when they are shut out of the process. The City Administration failed to consult neighborhood residents, city council members or Philadelphia’s design community before issuing this broad invitation for advertising in the public space. In issuing this RFP, the administration has stifled public access and discussion. It has also ignored laws regulating outdoor advertising and commercial advertising passed by Philadelphia’s elected officials. The ‘Coordinated Street Furniture Program,’ if not analyzed and planned for in a thorough and pluralistic manner, will compromise the beauty and vitality of Philadelphia. Let’s do it right. Open up the process to the public and include design professionals and community leaders who will ensure that the end result enhances the city’s streetscape for present and succeeding generations.

Read the Daily News Article on the street furniture program.
Download the "Request for Proposals for a Coordinated Street Furniture Program" issued by the Department of Public Property.

The Committee on Licenses and Inspections of the Council of the City of Philadelphia held a Public Hearing Monday, February 5, 2007, at 10:00 AM, in Room 400, City Hall, to hear testimony on the following item:
An Ordinance amending Chapter 10-1200 of The Philadelphia Code entitled "Posting of Temporary Signs" by allowing signs to be posted on utility poles and streetlights, all under certain terms and conditions.

A copy of the bill is available here.

Images taken from stopsnipesigns.com and streetspam.org

Snipe signs are cardboard signs nailed to telephone poles and utility structures, advertising a wide range of products and services, such as work from home, furniture closeouts, diets, real estate services, and roofing. The original bill that would have legalized these signs was amended to allow only non-commercial signs and set size and time limits.

Several council members expressed grave concerns regarding the bill and all but one district councilmember opted out and removed their districts from the language. The bill was voted out of committee and is before the council for final vote. The Bill’s sponsor, Councilwoman Jannie Blackwell’s West Philadelphia Council District supported loosening temporary non-commercial signage regulations in her district.

Commercial signage would still be prohibited in the new laws. Despite laws prohibiting the placement of signs in public spaces. communities nationwide are struggling to keep their streets clear of snipe signs. Below are some links for more information about these groups and their cause:

• Streetspam.org
• Stopsnipesigns.com
• City of Charleston notice against snipe signs

In September 2004, shortly after the passage of legislation that legalized gaming in Pennsylvania, SCRUB and the Pennsylvania Resources Council (PRC) approached the DVRPC with a request to complete a study of the impact of gaming facilities in Philadelphia and surrounding areas. Gary Jastrzab, of the Philadelphia City Planning Commission, and Lynne Bush, of Bucks County Planner, supported the proposal and presented it to DVRPC's where it was approved for funding.
The result is a comprehensive study that “provides a unique regional viewpoint and recommendations geared towards the topical areas of transportation, land use, and signage.”*

Above: The cover art from the full published study

A portion of the study addresses the concerns about new signage that would emerge both on and off site as a result of the casinos. These may include more billboards, "temporary signs along roadways," "digital billboards with rapidly changing images," and wall wraps on vacant buildings. "Orderly and legal signage is a challenge not only for the communities…but for the entire region. The affected communities must balance the need for economic growth with concerns over community aesthetics and traffic safety." Upon review of the legislation and ordinances on signage, the study found that the area's signage laws have not been updated to regulate new technologies practiced by the billboard industry. The DVRPC suggests "specific changes to local sign ordinances on sign types and classifications, and on sign removal, enforcement and permitting. The study also includes recommendations for wayfinding and directional signage, to ensure visitors can get to the casinos as easily and safely as possible."

We have extracted “Chapter 4: Signage and Visual Quality Impacts” from the study. The complete PDF of the study can be downloaded off the DVRPC website.

*Quotations from the Executive Summary of the DVRP study, “Impacts of Gaming in Greater Philadelphia.”