Allegheny County eyes billboards for revenues
Allegheny County Council is considering a proposal to allow billboards on 45 county-owned properties, including next to the county jail, that would generate more than $1.26 million annually for county coffers.
Three companies — Lamar Advertising, TS Outdoor Media and Interstate Outdoor Advertising — would construct a mixture of lighted billboards and traditional billboards in municipalities including Pittsburgh, Ross, Moon, Hampton, Bethel Park, Penn Hills and Wilkins.
“It's bad public policy, and it's ugly. Pittsburgh is noted for its beauty,” said former County Commissioner Mike Dawida, now executive director of Scenic Pittsburgh. “Digital, bright billboards are like televisions on a stick. The municipalities won't accept this.”
Dawida attended council's public works committee meeting on Thursday as members voted to table the proposal. The committee must approve it before the full council votes. County Executive Rich Fitzgerald proposed the idea.
“We continue to look for new revenue streams to reduce our reliance on property taxes,” county Manager William McKain said. “It would be done tastefully and only with the approval of local zoning.”
The billboard would have to conform to each municipality's zoning ordinances. McKain said the county could move forward with scaled-down versions of the plan if certain municipalities won't allow it.
Bobby Kerlik is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-320-7886 or email@example.com.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.