The Disappearing Urban Billboard
I’ve talked at length before about signs and billboards (here and here). These days it is all about the large-scale vinyl banner but in earlier times what wasn’t painted on the side of a building was set on the roof. I had never given these old billboards much thought, until recently.
Above is the Farmers and Merchants building in February of 2006 with an advertisement for the phone book, of all things. To preservation purists the billboard is an eyesore. The platform in front of the billboard masks the decorative elements along the parapet of the building and adds a cluttered look, right?
Above, in November 2007, the billboard is gone but the framework remains — for now. Soon the framework will be off to a metal recycler. Standing in the beautifully renovated South Side National Bank, now condos, with a representative from The Lawrence Group I couldn’t help feel a sudden loss when he indicated it was going away. “No!” I cried out.
I can’t fault the Lawrence Group, well, not too much. They own the building and want to do a new roof, hard to argue with that logic. I know if they wanted to install such a billboard folks would be upset. This, of course, got me wondering if I’d be one of those objecting to a large display of commercialism if this same billboard were proposed today.
Near my office, on South Kingshighway, is another rooftop billboard above the yummy Lily’s restaurant. This helps answer my question — I think I’d be able to support having such billboards along commercial streets. I’d be cautious about light pollution — excess light cast into nearby windows from the billboard. But in general, I rather like it.
Even though I don’t always like the message on the billboard, I like the presence. It adds a nice touch of urban messiness to the street. I like the shadows they cast. I like the details of the metal structure and the supports where the structure touches the roof or exterior masonry walls. I don’t want St. Louis to become Times Square or Las Vegas but such are part of our culture.
Above is from a scene in the classic 1992 film, Strictly Ballroom, with Scott and Fran dancing on the roof amongst the laundry and a Coke billboard. OK, that was based in Australia — see how universal the billboard truly is. We have Billboard magazine and I’m sure we’ve all seen a sitcom or two with folks up on a billboard trying to change the message.
I like urban clutter, but not just any clutter. I don’t like tons of little (or big) vinyl banners affixed to the face of buildings.  I’m also not a fan of the big billboard on a pole — just sticking up in the air, often next to the highway. But there is something about the rooftop billboard that I find endearing.
As a matter of public policy, I wouldn’t go so far as to prevent an owner from removing a billboard from their building but I could also see circumstances where not only might such a sign be welcomed, but actually encouraged. I could imagine allowing property owners along major streets to erect billboards as part of a development project — as an incentive for doing a more urban project. For example, say Walgreens were to renovate an existing urban building (aka up to sidewalk, parking on-street/behind) and then lease the 2nd floor apartments. I’d let them have a billboard on the roof for that.
I’d want it to be at least on a two-story building. Again, issues of light pollution would need to be addressed. Not Times Square, just enough to upset the anti-clutter folks.
Gotta say that economics should dictate the answer here. The City should never move to band such billboards. Sometimes the revenue they provide can be a difference maker for someone looking to rehab or reuse a building along a prominent roadway. That said, if the property owner believes they are better off without the ad revenue, then that it their decision. I agree a bit of character is lost, but what really matters is the underlying economic forces more so than the aesthetic.
So if one does place a billboard on their home? what comes to my mind is the length of highway 44 /Botanical Heights….I think you would be quick to change your mind if everyone started putting up billboards on their rooftops. And what is a prominent road? The highway? Gravios? Russell? could be hard to define is all I’m saying.
What comes to my mind is the difference of opinion that we millions of people have. All of the sudden, against all odds, Steve thinks billboards are acceptable. This isn’t curb cutouts – this is urban opinion. I also think the difficulty to determine the validity of each opinion. Then I think of this website, a site that is based on strong opinion and wonder if the headstrong here understand the right to think different.
bored at the moment and it is discussion worthy I suppose… The thought of Times Square and Piccadilly come to mind. I’ve gone to look at Times Square just to look at all the crazy billboards. So NY seems to be hip to the idea and I’d credit them with being “urban.” It’s been a few years since I’ve been there but Orlando, FL comes to mind as having billboards. I recall them having a passion for billboards but I’m not so sure I’d credit them with being “urban”. I guess it’s like how Steve described the differences in execution towards the end. I wonder if people want to take down the flying Budweiser eagle at Grand. I think that’s one of the symbols or structures that makes St. Louis what it is and would be a sorry day to see it removed.
Maurice that elevated stretch of ’44 is ripe for billboards with that high up view across the city. I think if someone in one of the new surburban style houses north of ’44 were to start putting put PT’s and and Casino Queen signs on their shingled gable roofs would probably cause controversy for that neighborhood but, with my twisted sense of humor, I would get a laugh out of it. Of course if I lived there I probably wouldn’t find it funny.
“What comes to my mind is the difference of opinion that we millions of people have. All of the sudden, against all odds, Steve thinks billboards are acceptable. This isn’t curb cutouts – this is urban opinion. I also think the difficulty to determine the validity of each opinion. Then I think of this website, a site that is based on strong opinion and wonder if the headstrong here understand the right to think different.”
.
huh? yes people, including steve, express opinions. just as you are doing.
Interesting that any building owner would willingly give up the revenue a billboard generates, even if it’s butt ugly. Much like cell phone antennas, location is everything, and both cell phone companies and billboard companies are willing to pay whatever it takes to get and keep the right locations. The revenues from the first billboard would have likely covered any and all homeowner association fees in perpetuity, and for a buyer that could’ve been a great sales point.
.
Personally, I’m not a big fan of billboards, especially ones like these. But since most have been in place a lot longer than I’ve been around, I accept them as a given in the urban landscape. Where I draw the line is adding new ones – I can think of very few situations where adding a billboard would improve the built environment . . .
If you want an integrated community, citizen involvement, a livable and prosperous city core, say NO to billboards as they lower the quality of life and serve as major distractions, especially for auto drivers. If you think advertising cheap products cheaply with billboards and turning urban life into a frantic chase for dollars, then bilboards make sense. Notice how billboard ads are now popping up on recently built garages? Billboards fit in perfectly with the car culture mentality.
Personally, give me good schools, low crime, density and an environment emphasizing quality over quantity and I’ll be there.
What, no discussion of the monstrosity hanging on the side of the new casino downtown?
My understanding is that right now, rooftop signs are prohibited, but it is possible to get a variance on this, such as the big SJI sign that was up for several years on a renovated warehouse on Locust. I agree with Steve that the occasional well located rooftop billboard adds some spice to the variety of the City’s urban lanscape, but I’m not sure how I would feel if it got to the point where there was a billboard every 1000 feet along busy City streets such as Gravois or Grand or Forest Park Blvd east of Kingshighway. I think there would come a point where the intersting sprinkle turns into an overwhelming onslauht (such as occured with advertising at the new Busch Stadium) I am not sure when you reach that breaking point, but I’m confident it would occur. At the same time, what would Clayton & Skinker be without the giant Amaco sign?
Billboards do add a certain life to a city, but the risk of overdoing it certainly exists. It is interesting how much nostalgia is wrapped up in billboards and advertising generally. I can only imagine the resistance to a behemoth like the Amaco sign when it was built, but now that it has been around awhile, people seem to regard it with a great deal of affection. Around the small town in Ohio where I grew up, one can still find the occasional Mail Pouch Tobacco ad painted on the side of a barn. They are considered ‘quaint reminders of a bygone era’ or some such antique-speak. If it were Joe Camel circa 1989, I don’t think it would engender the same warm fuzzy feelings (although the Times Square, smoke blowing sign became something of an icon http://www.si.edu/opa/insideresearch/photo_pages/V17_TimesSquare_smokerings.html). I wonder how long before people my age (26) are buying “We Buy Ugly Houses” stuff from antique dealers?
As long as south Kingshighway doesn’t turn into the Vegas strip, I say that billboards serve only to spice things up and announce that the city is alive and breathing.
There’s already plenty of billboards on the sides of buildings, not to mention on rooftops along Gravois, through North and South St. Louis. Yes, some of those have disappeared over the years as the buildings have been renovated and/or demolished. But too many of them still advertise alcoholic beverages; not so much tobacco products anymore, but that’s only because of overall restrictions on them.
After last July’s windstorm, a rooftop billboard on top of a recently remuddled 10-unit apartment building at the corner of Gravois and Nebraska toppled over, digging huge grooves into the roof, knocking bricks off the parapets, and resulting in the condemnation of the building and eviction of all tenants. It was quite a dramatic sight, until the remains of the billboard frame were removed.
Another thing about these billboards: oftentimes, they have different owners than the buildings. They are also taxed differently, so each one — whether rooftop or sidewall — has its own “Parcel” identifier, unless the Assessor has changed their database within the past two years and I am unaware.
If you ever get a chance to look at pictures of 19th century and early 20th century St. Louis, the one thing that will strike you is the absolute abundance of advertising. It is everywhere, on roofs, in windows, painted on the sides of buildings, hanging off buildings, glued to buildings, free standing billboards. If you look at the city today it looks bare. Maybe advertising is just the sign of a prosperous city. Those pictures are exciting to look at because of the diversity of products being sold, and in many cases they were nicely painted.
Maybe 19th century and first-half of 20th century was prosperous time for billboards because it was one of few options available to advertisers. Less TV and radio and certainly no Internet. Prominent signs in high-traffic areas were the cost-effective way to build name recognition.
True, there has been a change in the way people are marketed to, but if you look at the most vibrant places in the world, many of them are completely filled with advertising. That shows that there are people on the streets to advertise to. I don’t think billboards will necessarily make a place more vibrant or prosperous; they are just a symbol of a vibrant prosperous place, a place where marketers are going to try anything possible to get our money. I’m afraid that in most places in St. Louis they don’t even see the point of trying because maybe the market isn’t there, maybe the regulatory environment is preventing advertising, maybe people are just not getting out of their cars and off the highways. If people were coming to our city in droves, shopping in our stores, walking on our streets, you would see billboards and other forms of advertising and they would be symbols of a prosperous city.
Let the gaudy things hang. At least the bldgs are still standing.
Someone made mention of billboards popping up on garages lately and though I have yet to see that, what I do see more and more of are the rolling billboards….vehicles wrapped in plastic. The first few were oddities, worth noting, now they are just blah. I’m just not that impressed. Of course part of what has changed for the environment is the very nature of advertisement. With the rise of the internet, why reach locally when one can reach globally for a few dollars more? (with no upkeep, ease to change as needed, etc).
But I do think some signage is appropriate in the right areas.(and appropriate messages i.e. no fetus)
From today’s P-D: ” News > St. Louis City / County > Story > Lumiere’s light display will transform the night skyline” – is it a billboard or is it art?!
Different city, different perspective: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/5367321.html
I think “mental pollution” is probably a better, and more accurate, term.
Great post Steve. Although I agree that pole billboards along highways can lower property value, and serve as an eyesore; I also think advertising can add charm and character to a neighborhood. I think with a little thought and design, billboards can work. Hanging banners in the right area, or painted ads on brick are just a few cases. Every now and then a banner is hung on the side of the Thaxton building. It looks great, saves space, uses no electricity and works much better than a mini billboard on a small platform. It just takes some thought, and participation.