The Great Sign Debate

Picture by Kirk McKoy, Los Angeles Times

The great sign debate continues in Los Angeles! Not sure I’m too surprised by that after they extended the moratorium until today (March 26) in December of 08’ then extended it again until May 10^th on February 24, 09’. However, the ICO [Interim Control Ordinance] still expires today and, according to a statement from Councilman Jack Weiss' office in February, if the ICO is allowed to lapse for even one day, "a flurry of illegal signs could be installed and be nearly impossible to remove later." As parts of the battle play out in court, complicated by free-speech questions, billboard companies have rushed to put up as many new signs as they can. The result is a legal and political mess.

“In recent weeks, fueled by anger about what public officials have allowed opportunistic billboard companies to get away with, the Great Signage Debate has become L.A.'s version of the AIG bonus scandal, with political posturing to match. Fresh drama is likely to unfold this morning, when the Planning Commission meets in Van Nuys to try to break its recent deadlock, pass a new sign ordinance and send it along to the City Council (Christopher Hawthorn, March 26, 2009).”

Because I recently blogged about this in Moratorium extended on digital signs in L.A., I thought I would share L.A.’s great signage debate by Christopher Hawthorn which was printed in the Los Angeles Times today. It is a more philosophical look at the mess surrounding this debate and the reasons behind it.

Gwynn~