Billboards on Citi Field as seen from a highway. Image Credit: Google Maps

Advertising companies sought to erect outdoor billboards in the Willets Point neighborhood. Mucho Media and other property owners in Queens’ Willets Point neighborhood sought to construct large advertising billboards on their property. For safety and aesthetic reasons, the City denied or ordered the removal of billboards in the Willets Point neighborhood. These actions were pursuant to the City’s zoning law that prohibits commercial billboards within two hundred feet of an arterial highway. (read more…)

The Board of Standards and Appeals had denied the application based on its finding that the signage was an art installation rather than an “advertising sign,” as defined in the Zoning Resolution. Local Law 31 of 2005 amends the regulations governing the usage of outdoor advertising signs by requiring companies engaged in outdoor advertising to submit to the Department of Buildings an exhaustive list of all of the companies’ “signs, sign structures and sign locations” which are located within 900 feet and within view of an arterial highway. Pursuant to Local Law 31, a Sign Registration Application was submitted to the Department of Buildings on April 4, 2011 to register an advertising sign-structure on the south wall of a six-story parking garage located at 111 Varick Street in Lower Manhattan, which is 57 feet from the Holland Tunnel—a designated arterial highway under the Zoning Resolution. The Department of Buildings rejected the application on March 12, 2012 by pointing to evidence indicating that the sign’s size and orientation had been changed, which are actions in violation of the Zoning Resolution. On January 15, 2013, the Board of Standards and Appeals agreed with the Buildings’ determination that the sign structure’s status as an “advertising sign,” as defined by Zoning Resolution § 12-10, was discontinued when Terry Fugate-Wilcox leased the sign structure from 1979 to 1989 to display his art installation titled the “Holland Tunnel Wall,” and the Board affirmed the denial of the application.

(read more…)

New City regulations would substantially limit billboards near highways. Clear Channel, the owner of large billboards located near arterial highways, and Metro Fuel LLC, the owner of smaller illuminated advertising signs on building fronts and poles close to the street, sued the City, challenging its outdoor advertising restrictions. The companies claimed that the restrictions limiting the location and illumination of commercial billboards and smaller signs, as well as the strict permitting and registration procedures for existing outdoor signs, were unconstitutional and infringed on their commercial speech. They further claimed that the City enforced its regulations unevenly and that the regulatory scheme was full of exceptions. Metro Fuel specifically claimed that the City allowed panel advertising on street furniture, kiosks, and lampposts, while forbidding similar Metro Fuel panels attached to buildings and poles.

District Court Judge Paul Crotty detailed the history of outdoor advertising, concluding that companies had long ignored or failed to comply with City regulations. The companies had challenged enforcement efforts in court, waited until the City’s efforts at enforcement subsided, or waited for a new, less vigilant administration. Judge Crotty found that the companies’ efforts had paid off because of the sporadic enforcement and the City’s grandfathering of non-compliant signs. (read more…)