Just a quick follow-up to my last entry. Look what was in the CityPaper this week:
http://citypaper.net/articles/current/canon.shtml
This is certainly a much more serious take on the matter. I never really tend to think of the billboards in question as a "blight" because frankly, the neighborhoods most of them are in aren't in the best of shape anyway. But if they're illegal, then get 'em out, because like writer Bruce Schimmel says, allowing any of them to stay while eliminating others is, in essence, "secretly deciding which historically abused neighborhoods should continue to be blighted."
Although my neighborhood contains a fair number of the ads in question, I don't think of it as "historically abused." I'm sure he was referring more to the much poorer and much more blighted neighborhoods to the north, west, and southwest of here. Just to clear that up. But I agree with him in principle, I'm just not up in arms about it yet.
3 comments:
If you can't beat the "flyposters", as they're known over here, at least impose some order. The Executive has been working on some plans to define specific sites for these kinds of posters, and it's working quite well here in Glasgow. I'll photograph and blog some of these when I get a chance.
Oh, you've been spam-commented quite a bit. Be sure to trash these morons and keep the blog tight, tidy and relevant.
haha! all these comments are hilarious
andrew
Wow, I have no idea what happened there with all those spam posts. I guess that's what I get for allowing anonymous comment posting.
Thanks for the links, Paul. It's interesting to see how people are dealing with the same problem elsewhere.
Post a Comment