A Daily News OpEd weighs in on City Councilman’s Richard Alcorn’s proposed deal–which now has delightfully idiotic name–with a sign company to swap out smaller signs for digital billboards. Via the News: “Under the “Billboard Reduction Trade Program,” a company could put up a new billboard outside the designated sign districts, in whatever community they agree to remove signs. That’s more than a little troubling.” [DN]
More here:
Reducing, Trading, Possibly Masquerading: A Daily News OpEd weighs in…
Related Posts
- Billboard Ban Reaction, and Is Alarcon Now Anti?
Checking in with Dennis Hathaway of the Coalition to Ban Billboard Blight on today’s approved emergency measure to ban new digital billboards and supergraphics, we find a mixed reaction. And a mixed reaction is not entirely surprising, since today’s ban really just acts as a placeholder until the city can figure out a long-term citywide billboard policy (and its policy for sign districts). First, a little background on today’s decision: The council’s move was prompted by a forthcoming decision expected in a larger lawsuit brought by billboard company Liberty Media that related to the Interim Control Ordinance, that temporary billboard ban enacted earlier this year. The decision in the Liberty case is expected to come on August 17th, when the City Council is on vacation, and if Liberty wins, the city could be flooded with billboard applications, according to an earlier Los Angeles Times story.
Says Hathaway: “We’re very happy to see a permanent ban on digital billboards, which generate lots of money for sign companies and property owners, but have an enormously negative affect on the rest us through light pollution, excessive energy use, and the potential to distract drivers and create traffic hazards. However, the city council still needs to act on the comprehensive sign code revisions approved by the City Planning Commission last March. These include measures to mitigate the worst effects of the approximately 100 digital billboards up now, as well as restrictions on the size and placement of signs and tough new penalties to deter companies and property owners from putting up illegal billboards and supergraphic signs.”
Meanwhile, the LA Weekly reports that Councilman Richard Alarcon did an “about face” at today’s council meeting. You’ll recall that Alacorn was pushing for that sign swap bill. Via the Weekly:
“‘We have plenty of signs out there,’ said Councilman Richard Alarcon. ‘We don’t need more.’ It was an about-face for Alarcon, who tried to convince the council last month to allow a law that would allow each member to orchestrate a sign swap, which would allows some digital billboards in exchange for the removal of old signs.”
· Hernia Surgery Be Damned: Billboard Ban Passes [Curbed LA]Go here to read the rest:
Billboard Ban Reaction, and Is Alarcon Now Anti? - Because It Worked Out So Well the First Time?: Whatever your feelings about billboards,…
Whatever your feelings about billboards, most people would agree that the 2006 legal settlement the city made with the sign companies was a complete disaster since it allowed digital billboards to go up willy-nilly throughout Los Angeles. (Exhibit A: The digital sign on Silver Lake Blvd.) And yesterday, a city councilman proposed… cutting another deal with a billboard company, reports the Los Angeles Times. “Los Angeles City Councilman Richard Alarcon called on his colleagues Wednesday to pursue an elaborate swap that could allow a single company to erect 450 new billboards — including 50 digital signs — in exchange for the removal of thousands of others.” [LA Times]Excerpt from:
Because It Worked Out So Well the First Time?: Whatever your feelings about billboards,… - Some of those Street Signs Coming Down?
These are the signs you have to be careful not to walk into. Five years ago, advertising company Metrolights (a company which is now known as Fuel Outdoor) sued the city after being ticketed for non-permitted street signs. In their case, Metrolights argued the city couldn’t prohibit new “off-site” signs while also selling other outdoor space. Well, a judge ruled in favor of the city, and today, the US Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of the case, effectively ending the matter, according to the Coalition to End Billboard Blight. The Billboard Blight people are wondering whether the signs will now come down, asking “wouldn’t a justifiable result be the removal of all the illegal signs and disgorgement of a significant amount of that revenue the company bet it could make and put in the bank? ” Ah, tasty disgorgement. Back in January, following the 9th Circuit win, a rep for then city attorney Rocky Delgadillo us that it was up to Building and Safety to ticket the signs.
- People Get Horny in the Summer: Headline from Daily News story (and…
Headline from Daily News story (and filed under Breaking News and currently on their home page, top right): “Backyard masturbator wakes Woodland Hills family.”
View original post here:
People Get Horny in the Summer: Headline from Daily News story (and… - tujunga ca | Daily News
Tujunga, California CA Community Profile / Los Angeles County, CA Data Find the Tujunga, California Homes for Sale that you're looking for on homes.com . Search our website to locate your Homes for Sale & Real Estate in Tujunga …
Read this article:
tujunga ca | Daily News
Discussion
No comments for “Reducing, Trading, Possibly Masquerading: A Daily News OpEd weighs in…”