| « Rug Barn building getting some TLC | Home | Photos ~ This Shirt last Friday at Hell's Kitchen (update 1) » |
Latest Entries
Photos ~ Frost Park Chalk Off #19
Photos ~ 'Meaties' BBQ With Friends
Testing comments... Check. Check.
Tue. June 12, 2007, 08:08am PDT
76% of Tacoma billboards 'non-complying'
A report from the City Manager to the City Council states that 76% of all Tacoma billboards don't comply with a 1997 ordinance. Ten years later, the compliance grace period will be up in August. The report reads:
...Bill Pugh provides the following report on the status of billboards within the City of Tacoma. In 1997 the City Council adopted TMC 13.06.524 requiring all legal nonconforming billboard signs to be discontinued and removed, or made conforming within ten years from the effective date of the new regulations. The end of the ten-year amortization period will occur on August 1, 2007. In December 2005, City staff advised Clear Channel of the upcoming compliance date; and, the Council was subsequently briefed at a July 2006 Study Session.
Our records indicate that 76% of the 193 billboards are nonconforming and Clear Channel is the owner of all billboard signs within the City at this time. Next week the Building and Land Use Services Division will send letters to Clear Channel and owners of the property where signs are located, requesting a schedule that addresses the removal or billboard structures, or how they will be brought into compliance with the code by August 1, 2007. Should property owners fail to comply, Tacoma Municipal Code Section 13.06.610 provides for fines and penalties that address code violations.
Link to City Manager's report (full report PDF)
So, what have we learned here? First that most local billboards don't comply with a nearly 10 year old regulation and that all (not some, not most) 193 billboards in Tacoma are owned by Clear Channel. That's an impressive monopoly that hopefully will be dutifully overseen by the city in light of this info. I hoped to provide info about exactly what municipal code 13.06.524 says but it's nowhere to be found in the Title 13 PDF on the City's website. Anyone care to clarify this point? I'm assuming since it's been on the books since 1997 it would surely be included on the website.
Maybe they could have a citizens brigade go out and force compliance. "Decapitate a billboard today for a brighter tomorrow!"
Thanks Erik!
Comments (10) | To Top
6/12/2007 @ 8:25am
Probably a mis-print - signs are in 13.06.521
by Bob
6/12/2007 @ 9:12am
Yea, looks like the billboard related info is in 13.06.521.M and .N
Doesn't shed much light except for those billboards that on rooftops (isn't there one at 6th Ave and Union?) or too near things like a residential district, church or school. It'd be great to have a map of all Tacoma billboards and those the City deems non-conforming.
by KevinFreitas
6/12/2007 @ 9:25am
I thought we were waiting on some legal issues to play out in Federal Way before we jumped in and started fining the billboard companies? Did the city attorneys give the ok to start going after them or are going to be sued by one of the largest media companies in the country?
by Jake
6/12/2007 @ 9:41am
Its amazing where billboards are brutishly located in Tacoma. Even in small neighborhood business districts.
Bill Evans and other council members worked hard on this issue 10 years ago at a time before Evans was on council.
The plan was that they would pass the ordinance to reduce the number of billbaords in the city to allow their value to depreciate over a 10 year period.
Now 10 years has passed and city is getting ready to enforce the ordinance as they should. Somehow, Tacoma allowed the billboards to blight up the city. Here's finally a change to have them many of them removed.
Yet, of course, the entire city council has changed during the 10 years (Although Mayor Baarsma apparently was on the council then).
It is up to the new council to enforce the will of the old one.
The city needs to move diligently in August to enforce their code or they may lose the chance to remove "non-complying" billboards.
Nice work councilmember Evans! Let's see this blight removal project through. I can't think of any other single action by council which would have such a great visual impact.
The billboards are also damping some investment. Who would want to build a quality looking building next to a huge billboard?
by Erik B.
6/12/2007 @ 9:57am
I would like to see more guerilla artist attacks on all those stupid clear channel spam billboards.
by RR sez: Ron english Billboard Remixes
6/13/2007 @ 9:21am
I and Im sure others would like to see them gone completely! I lived in Maine and Vermont where they are completely banned. Its nice to not be bombarded with them.Im amazed how the tribes pollute the landscape with them.
by wAHSEGA
6/15/2007 @ 6:19pm
According to 13.06.521.N.6.c.(6) they've got until August 1 to remove or bring to compliance -- so let's keep attention on how things look that day. I suspect ClearChannel will either ignore or ask for a continuance/pardon/boo-hoo-poor-rich-us if they haven't been acting on this. I'm glad to see this ordinance was not forgotten.
What Ron said. Sic your local taggers on the billboards, they could use a little "updating". :)
by TheDamnMushroom
8/1/2007 @ 2:01am
Greetings, it's August 1. So... Has ClearChannel fixed or removed those billboards, or has the whining and filing for injunctions started?
by TheDamnMushroom
8/1/2007 @ 7:05am
I believe the latter, unfortunately.
by KevinFreitas
8/2/2007 @ 1:51am
Once this becomes known, it'd make a good post. :) In the meantime, it is definitely worth mentioning in case the city and the citizens have forgotten about 13.06.521.N.6.c.(6)
by TheDamnMushroom