Lamar to Remove E-Billboard

The controversial electronic billboard at the Grant Street Transportation Center in downtown Pittsburgh will come down by September 1.
Scenic Pittsburgh, a non-profit dedicated to removing visual blight, announced it has negotiated an agreement with the Pittsburgh Parking Authority, the City of Pittsburgh and sign owner Lamar Advertising to remove the 19' by 58' electronic billboard at 55 11th Street.

In 2007, a city zoning administrator issued a permit without requiring Lamar to seek two required variances. But in 2008, Councilmen Ricky Burgess, Patrick Dowd, Bruce Kraus, Bill Peduto and Doug Shields objected to the project. The city revoked the permit and Lamar then sought to get the variances. But the Zoning Board of Adjustment rejected the variance request, and Allegheny County and Commonwealth Courts upheld that decision.
Scenic Pittsburgh Executive Director Mike Dawida says the sign should have then been torn down immediately and when it wasn't, his organization filed suit in March which led to today's announcement.....
"We are pleased about the agreement, as this partially completed sign hanging at a prominent downtown intersection has remained an eyesore for more than three years."

Dawida says Lamar will pay for the removal of the sign..."Ironically, the only thing keeping it from being torn down quickly is the time it will take to get the proper permits to bring it down. That's ironic because they never got the permits to put it up."

Dawida added that more communities are turning away from the electronic billboards including six cities in Texas and St. Louis...
"Electronic billboards are extremely intrusive and ugly and energy hogs and distracting. What you're seeing rather than more cities building them, cities are saying we don't want them or we only want them in certain places."

He says Scenic Pittsburgh is moving forward to remove other illegal billboards, but because of state law, most billboards in Pittsburgh enjoy grandfathered legal status. "Hundreds of non-conforming billboards would be illegal otherwise."

The organization is working with Pittsburgh Council on developing a more stringent billboard policy and Dawida expects passage by late summer.

Downtown Billboard Targeted in Court

A local nonprofit has petitioned the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas to order the removal of a large electronic billboard in downtown Pittsburgh.

Scenic Pittsburgh Executive Director Mike Dawida says he was driven to file a complaint in court after months of being ignored by the city’s Bureau of Building Inspection.

Hanging over 11th Street at the Greyhound station, the 1100-square-foot sign remains incomplete three years after construction began.

Lamar started to build the sign in February 2008 with city approval, but City Council said it violated a no-billboard zoning area and later put a moratorium on all electronic billboards.

Dawida says a court order should force the city to remove it right away.

“They have two options: they can tear it down themselves and bill the Lamar company, or they can ask Lamar to tear it down themselves,” says Dawida. “Either way would be fine by me, but it should be torn down.”

Dawida says the billboard is an eyesore and the city should stand by the public zoning process.

City Law Department to Pay Part of Council Legal Bill

Pittsburgh's Law Department will pay about half of legal bills incurred by Council members who challenged a billboard permit downtown. Council members Bill Peduto, Bruce Kraus, Ricky Burgess and Doug Shields hired a lawyer to help them in their dispute with Lamar Advertising, and they were billed $10,706. Councilman Patrick Dowd was also involved in the legal dispute with Lamar, but retained his own counsel. His legal bill is not included in the Law Department's decision.

Lamar Advertising has since re-applied for the billboard permit. A hearing is scheduled for later this month.

Shields to Call for Council to Pay Lawyer's Fee

Pittsburgh City Council President Doug Shields will motion to make a $10,706 lawyer bill a city expense. The fee was originally incurred during the challenge of a permit granted for Lamar Advertising to construct a billboard downtown by Shields and fellow Councilmen Bruce Kraus, William Peduto, and Ricky Burgess. When they sought to have the city pay for it, the Law Department issued a 13-page opinion which said that if the four men voted on making the fee a city expense, they would create a conflict-of-interest situation, and may be required to "immediately forfeit their office." In response, Shields has gotten a counter-opinion. His 4-page report comes from Marvin A. Fein, a former deputy solicitor. This opinion states that "The City Solicitor did not have a legal basis to preclude Council from discussing or voting," nor for "threatening them with forfeiture of office." Shields says the most egregious part is that the councilmen were threatened with removal from office even though municipal leaders cannot be removed without evidential hearings and a senatorial vote. The Council President may bring the fee up for vote tomorrow.

Mayor Advises Council to Head for City Ethics Board

Mayor Luke Ravenstahl commented last week that the 4 council members who walked out of a vote last week because of a potential conflict of interest should voluntarily take their case to the city's Ethics Board. William Peduto, Ricky Burgess, Doug Shields, and Bruce Kraus excused themselves from voting on whether the city should pay for a $10, 706 legal bill incurred when they sought another legal opinion regarding the Lamar Advertising downtown billboard conflict. An opinion from the city solicitor's office says the bill was a personally incurred expense, and discussing it in council, let alone voting on it, would create a conflict of interest.
The mayor offered advice from his own experience. Last summer, he went before the board after accepting a $9,000 ticket for a charity golf outing, courtesy of the Penguins and the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. He says he doesn't think the council members knowingly did any wrong, and they would have a chance to state their case, like he did. He's glad that Councilman Burgess invited the state ethics board to get involved, and says it's their perogative how to proceed.