Burrito Justice sawrit too. Can’t wait to see what goes up. I hope it’s three or four American Apparel ads.
7 Responses to “Helluva Morning For Mucking About With Billboards”
Allan Hough (7858)
Brittany Janis & Katie Cruz (104)
Authors
Burrito Justice sawrit too. Can’t wait to see what goes up. I hope it’s three or four American Apparel ads.
Allan Hough (7858)Brittany Janis & Katie Cruz (104)
Wow, that’s cool to see from both perspectives. Now all we need is a photo from Bernal!
I want Silence.
Good call.
Am I the only one who thinks that Clear Channel’s been eating crazy pills? What happened to 2002′s Prop G? You know, the one which created SF municipal planning code section 611 which reads:
No new general advertising signs shall be permitted at any location within the City as of March 5, 2002
That ordinance is the reason we don’t have as many billboards as we already do, and it’s the reason the famous “17 Reasons Why” billboard on 17th and Mission was finally taken town and replaced with a big 33′ visual fart. Well… I’m off to write my supervisor.
test
From what I saw, it looked like they were replacing the existing billboard skeleton. And from what I understand, Prop G banned billboards in *new* locations. The city can go after existing signs that don’t have permits, or those that are considered unsafe. Naturally, the fine people at Clear Channel are fighting this in court on 1st Amendment grounds. More at SFGate.
According to the city rules, any billboards erected after 2002 and ones that do not comply with planning codes are considered to be in violation of the law.
When the city identifies such a billboard, it issues a violation notice to the sign company and property owner and gives them several weeks to remove the sign or resolve permit problems or code infractions.
If the owners don’t respond in the time allotted, fines ranging from $100 a day to $2,500 per day can be imposed, depending on the size of the sign. Owners can challenge the violation before an administrative law judge. But if they lose the appeal and the billboard in question has remained up during the appeal, they are charged a fixed penalty of $2,000 to $50,000 depending on the size of the sign.
That being said, Clear Channel doesn’t seem too quick on the draw – they just covered over Silence after two months, and Hater has lasted even longer. All the more reason to hope for the Silence and Girafa treatment!
but do they have a building permit? doubtful.
Somebody had permits:
http://sf.everyblock.com/building-permits/streets/mission-st/3300-3328/1-block/by-project-type/349/
http://sf.everyblock.com/building-permits/streets/mission-st/3300-3328/1-block/by-project-type/324/
Note prop G is specifically mentioned in this one:
http://services.sfgov.org/dbipts/default.aspx?page=Permit&PermitNumber=200610256007
[...] billboards-mission-district- missionmission.org [...]