THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Tuesday, March 14, 1995 TAG: 9503140019
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A14 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
LENGTH: Medium: 51 lines
Promoting Norfolk's enticements to tourists, conventioneers and other visitors - notably, Waterside festival marketplace, Nauticus, Virginia Zoo, Norfolk Botanical Garden, Chrysler Museum, Virginia Opera, Virginia Stage Company, Virginia Symphony - is essential to the old port city's well-being. But does Norfolk's municipal government really want an electronic billboard on city-owned land beside Waterside Drive that would hawk soft drinks, office space, gasoline - whatever - as well as the city's attractions? We hope not.
According to staff writer Alex Marshall's report in Sunday's Virginian-Pilot and Ledger-Star, four members of Norfolk's seven-member City Council are disposed to reverse the city's longstanding policy against free-standing commercial billboards in the downtown district. The impetus for the proposed turnaround is a proposal by a young entrepreneur to erect a two-sided, changeable-message electronic sign. Fifty-one percent of the sign's messages would be devoted to public-service announcements; 49 percent would tout products and services.
Richard James, a Norfolk police detective, has been pressing his sign concept for a decade. Vice Mayor Paul Riddick says that the James initiative has gotten nowhere because its sponsor is black. That's nonsense.
The zoning law raises obstacles to billboards as part of Norfolk's ongoing effort to create a handsome urban environment that has drawn outside investors and increasing numbers of visitors to the city. A sign bearing commercial messages would run counter to the city's purpose. Besides, the James sign would be on city-owned land. Do Norfolk taxpayers want the city to lease slices of public property downtown for private billboards?
Norfolk City Hall is understandably fussy about signs in its still-redeveloping downtown. Americans have had enough of billboard clutter. Norfolk's design-review and planning commissions have unanimously said no to the proposed commercial sign. City Council could nonetheless ignore their advice and amend the zoning ordinance to allow privately owned billboards on city-owned-or-controlled property downtown. But it should avoid setting the precedent.
City, county, state and federal governments have been tightening regulation of outdoor advertising for decades. They have battled uphill against the powerful billboard lobby. Their successes have banished much ugliness and visual disharmony.
Norfolk City Council has scheduled a public hearing March 21 on the zoning-ordinance amendment. That will be the time to speak up. Do. by CNB