Lamar calls banner First Amendment right; Pittsburgh calls it 'blighted eyesore'

Sign up for one of our email newsletters.Updated 2 hours ago Lamar Advertising Co. isn't giving up its fight to keep an advertising banner on Mt. Washington. The Baton Rouge, La.-based billboard firm has appealed the Pittsburgh Zoning Board of Adjustment's...

Lamar calls banner First Amendment right; Pittsburgh calls it 'blighted eyesore'

Sign up for one of our email newsletters.

Updated 2 hours ago

Lamar Advertising Co. isn't giving up its fight to keep an advertising banner on Mt. Washington.

The Baton Rouge, La.-based billboard firm has appealed the Pittsburgh Zoning Board of Adjustment's decision to uphold citations the city's Department of Permits Licenses and Inspections issued last year.

PLI said Lamar violated zoning regulations by failing to obtain a permit before pasting a vinyl black-and-gold Sprint banner across the huge sign that for years had been an electronic advertisement for Bayer and also a clock.

On Tuesday, Pittsburgh filed a lawsuit seeking a court order to remove the unauthorized sign. Late Wednesday, Lamar filed its response. Both actions were filed in Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas. Court dates have not been set.

“It's unfortunate that's Lamar and Sprint have apparently decided again to not be good corporate citizens and have chosen instead to ignore zoning laws and hold this city hostage to a blighted eyesore on a prominent location on Mt. Washington,” Kevin Acklin, Mayor Bill Peduto's chief of staff, said in response to Lamar's appeal.

Downtown attorney Jonathan Kamin, who represents Lamar, could not be reached for comment.

Lamar claims Pittsburgh for more than two years delayed action on its application to modernize the electronic sign with LED lighting, according to the appeal.

It accused Peduto and other city officials of publicly proclaiming they would not approve the application unless the city approved advertisements featured on the sign.

The company called the zoning board decision “arbitrary, capricious, unfounded, contrary to the evidence, contrary to law, replete with errors of law and politically motivated.”

“The (zoning board) intentionally and without privilege to do so, entered the (zoning board) decision for the express purpose of silencing Lamar's commercial speech in violation of its constitutional rights as guaranteed by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution,” Lamar said in the appeal.

Bob Bauder is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at bbauder@tribweb.com.

Our editors found this article on this site using Google and regenerated it for our readers.

NEXT NEWS