The Los Angeles City Planning Commission approved an ordinance last week aimed at limiting the proliferation of billboards, which have become more prevalent in Los Angeles.
If passed by the City Council, the ordinance could bring a major reduction in advertisement through billboards, posters and digital signs in parts of Los Angeles, including Westwood.
Two large advertisements on Le Conte and Broxton avenues, along with dozens of less prominent Westwood signs, could eventually be taken down.
The ordinance identifies specific districts that would permit residents to petition city government for the allowance of billboard signs, according to Dennis Hathaway, president of the Coalition to Ban Billboard Blight. One of these sign districts is located in Westwood surrounding the intersection of Westwood and Wilshire boulevards.
This change would not take effect immediately, Hathaway said.
The ordinance will likely be subject to a number of lawsuits from companies that use billboard advertisements, Hathaway said. He added that budget concerns might limit the city’s ability to enforce new restrictions.
The city submitted the ordinance in response to increased advertising aggression over the last three years, Hathaway said.
“Companies aim to put up more and more signs ““ to make it impossible to go outside without getting a message to buy something,” he said.
One of the major issues with recent advertisements has been the spread of supergraphics, signs that extend across whole sides of buildings, he said.
Many of these signs are already illegal under a 2002 ordinance that banned off-site signs, which advertise a service that is unrelated to the premise on which they are placed. Hathaway said the 2002 ordinance failed to reduce the presence of billboards because of a lack of enforcement and insufficient penalties for advertisers.
The new ordinance seeks to cover up gaps in the original ban.
“The old ordinance imposed a maximum penalty of $100 a day for having an illegal sign. Some of these signs get up to $50,000 a month in revenue,” Hathaway said.
By contrast, the new ordinance could impose a tax on advertisers up to $48,000 a day for the promotion of an illegal sign.
There appears to be no opposition to the ordinance from community members, most of whom would prefer to see fewer billboards on the streets, Hathaway said.
He added that the city would suffer no economic loss from the reduction of billboards, which pay very little in property tax to Los Angeles.
“If anything, I think there’s evidence that the billboards harm economic activity in a region,” he said. “A neighborhood that has a nicer environment does better.”
Barbara Drucker, professor and associate dean of the UCLA art department, said she agreed with the ordinance’s goal to reduce off-site signs. She argued that billboards do not carry enough artistic or popular culture value to merit their preservation.
“As an artist and a resident, I think the fewer billboards the better,” she said. “I don’t want the city that I live in to be cluttered with advertisements. I’d rather have the city promote quality of life than allow a commercial focus on what we should buy.”