A few years ago meetings were packed as residents made it pretty clear they didn’t want giant billboards in the community. This one is at Route 29 and Route 30 in East Whiteland Township, Chester County.
There was all sorts of wrangling that seemed to go on forever.
In 2021 I think it was, a settlement reached between East Whiteland and the then billboard company Catslyst. Permits were issued. Residents and the township were stuck with it.
Residents still did not want the billboards. But honestly? The residents didn’t fight as hard in my opinion as they did in other cases. And then there was COVID to factor in at the time.
People get all fired up about issues where they live. But there isn’t the same staying power as there used to be. I don’t know how else to say it. Residents all say something is terrible, but if they don’t get instant gratification after a couple of meetings, interest wanes. A few diehards will keep going to meetings, but as my friends and I learned from the Institute for Justice when fighting eminent domain all those years ago in Ardmore, when government officials only hear from the same people they start to tune them and the issue out. It’s not ignorance, it’s kind of human nature. When it’s the same person time in and time out it’s just blah blah blah after a while.
After a settlement was achieved, the “monument” to ugliness was erected. Now we remember that people were told how it would be good looking and landscaping maintained, right?
Wrong.
It’s a weed pit.
Meanwhile there were all of the issues with clear cutting of trees at the “monument” location in East Whiteland on 202. The worst of it was around 2022.
After that there were issues with the display on the 202. They did work on it for a long time. I guess the sign is viable but a lot of times when we go by it’s off.
So the Routes 30 and 29 billboard is active. Garish and distracting visually, I think the ugliness of the display is increased by the unkempt and weedy appearance of the property.
A little over a year ago this time the media was full of stories about the original billboard company and its owner. Financial woes. But he doesn’t own these billboards in East Whiteland any longer I guess? Why do I say that ? The billboards both now say OutFront.
Well the monument to ugliness is a hot mess but the billboard slum overlords do not care. I have been hearing that the East Whiteland Route 30 one is not the only one needing property tending. Apparently along 202 at least one of those is super weedy too.
I still hate these things. Why couldn’t Pennsylvania be a state that doesn’t have them?
Alaska, Hawaii, Vermont, and Maine prohibit the construction of new billboards to preserve their natural beauty and scenic landscapes. Oregon has a “cap-and-replace” law, so new billboards can only be built if existing ones are removed. Visit Scenic America to learn more about reducing billboard ugliness.
Billboards are not dead in Bryn Mawr. This affects Lower Merion and Haverford Townships.
This has been going on since 2009.
15 damn years.
I doubt very much the Billboard Baron would want billboards on the lawn of his Gladwyne McMansion, but maybe that’s the place where they ought to go, huh?
So I received an email from the current 5th ward commissioner in Haverford Township Laura Cavendish. Her predecessors, the late Andy Lewis and Jeff Heilmann also both fought billboards alongside their residents and constituents.
From Commissioner Laura Cavendish we have sadly learned that the billboard issue is active again, and it has never actually died as an issue in Haverford and Lower Merion Townships . I’m really glad that she sent the update, because her Lower Merion counterpart has been seemingly silent on the issue, hasn’t he? But hey if there are babies to be kissed or photo ops cutting ribbons to be had, he’s your guy.
Here is what the email I received said:
April 24, 2024
Dear Ward 5 Residents,
It was great to see so many of you at the polls yesterday. I shared with some of you a letter which I am now sharing here.
I wanted to provide an update on the Township’s active litigation against four proposed billboards in Haverford, two of which would be located on Lancaster Avenue in Ward 5. For about 20 years, Haverford and Lower Merion have been fighting Catalyst, a company which has proposed four large billboards in Haverford Township. Two of these sites are located on Lancaster Avenue in Bryn Mawr, across from the Acme and near Our Mother of Good Counsel church in Haverford Township; two others are located on West Chester Pike.
In 2020, the Court of Common Pleas directed the two townships and Catalyst to come to a settlement. Since that time, Haverford has been working with Catalyst to identify a settlement that would reduce the number of billboard sites proposed by Catalyst and prevent future billboards anywhere in the Township.
As background, the township is legally required to zone an area that permits a billboard. A settlement would mean creating zoning for one, smaller digital billboard, most likely located near the entrance to I-476 on West Chester Pike. Additionally, Lower Merion would likely place a billboard along I-76 as part of the settlement, expressly for the purpose of taking the Lancaster Avenue sites off the table. If no settlement is reached, and the case goes back before the Court of Common Pleas, the judge would likely allow billboards on all four (or more) sites in Haverford, including the two sites on Lancaster.
Large billboards along Lancaster in Bryn Mawr would be viewed by drivers, pedestrians, shoppers, church goers, and so many others in our community. The right settlement would permanently prevent future billboards in the Township, rather than leaving the decision to a judge. Declining to settle would require spending more taxpayer dollars to appeal this case and the township would likely lose. The outcome could be multiple billboards throughout Haverford Township.
While I am strongly opposed to billboards in Haverford Township, given the history of this case and the potential for reducing damaging billboard blight, I will support the right settlement with Catalyst. I believe a settlement will protect Lancaster Avenue and Haverford Township permanently, as well as prevent billboards along our narrow residential thoroughfare in the heart of Bryn Mawr.
Please reach out if you would like to talk or learn more about this important issue.
This billboard company dude is the same one who has been littering our Chester County communities with these billboards as well.
It really is a crappy thing that our communities get saddled with these signs so he can make a profit. Because that’s all that this is about is money and when you meet people like this or you run into people like this, you have to ask once in a while when is there enough money? When do you perhaps need to think about what the right thing to do is?
First billboard hearing 2009
It’s time for the Billboard Baron to leave Bryn Mawr and all of these other communities alone. I hope these communities, and there respective municipalities still have some fight left in them. After all, there are a lot of us, myself included, who first stood up in 2009 when this all started. A lot of us have given up years to fight these blights on our communities.
I have been meaning and meaning to post this but life got in the way. PennDOT said NO to Outfront Media chopping down more trees. Outfront is who bought the Catalyst 202 billboard site in East Whiteland where the tree massacre occurred a while back in 2022. Of course, they can appeal, but hey this is lovely news.
And speaking of billboards, that thing at 29 and 30 is still so bright you need shades even at midnight so….maybe complain to PennDOT and East Whiteland instead of just to me?
Take a bow East Whiteland residents, take a bow. Good things happen when residents get involved and take action where they live. Now let’s work on getting the 29 and 30 billboard turned DOWN.
Maybe you think spending ad money to blind motorists from this insanely bright sign is the way to get new customers but you are selling cars so why aren’t you more concerned with driver safety?
I mean, do you think this sign is safe do you think this sign is not way too bright for its location? Do you think it’s nice to contribute to making the community in which you have a business as gaudy as Times Square?
I guess what I would just be thinking about if I was this car dealership is the fact that people already take issue with them because of the way, they essentially park cars right on the edge of Route 30 a lot of the time in East Whiteland.
But maybe you should put some money towards upkeep on those old structures on the property in East Whiteland and not billboard ads? These poor old and historic structures sure are getting run down looking or is that by design? Those are your rental properties correct?
And I don’t care what anyone thinks if I am singling out businesses that are contributing to the billboard blight on Route 30 by buying advertising. It is my right to comment, and I also think that if these are people and businesses doing business locally within a community that they should care about how the community looks, shouldn’t they? And is a giant billboard making Lancaster Avenue, AKA Route 30 in Frazer look like Times Square on a Thursday morning caring about the community?
Billboard Ad Blight award du jour goes to this car dealership. Shame on Jeff D’Ambrosio.
Too much? I don’t think so. How many of these GIANT ELECTRONIC OUTDOOR TV’s are supposed to light up our nights? We aren’t I-95. But now Outfront Advertising wants us to think so.
Yes, that is right, ANOTHER billboard application has been filed in East Whiteland Township. Another kill the trees for the Route 202 billboard. The application says 103 Feet East of Mill Lane.
To be clear, because I may not be being clear, this M-700 Application by Outfront Advertising AKA BILLBOARD COMPANY is to REMOVE and potentially unnaturally trim 150 year old sycamore trees not a brand new billboard per se. It FEELS like a new billboard because they are the successor owners to Catalyst. Catalyst had previously filed an M-700 with PennDOT after killing a slew of trees and then there was serious community uproar, and then before a decision was ultimately made if I recall correctly, the application was withdrawn and then the site flipped from Catalyst to Outfront.
This is next to a PARK and residents, as in real affected people. Like last time, it would be a heinous act with environmental, highway, and residential impacts. We are an area that floods now and badly with every heavy storm. Tree removal = more erosion and other impacts with stormwater impact. Overall environmentally this is bad and these are OUR heritage trees. Why do we have to lose more heritage trees in our communities for billboards? Scenic highways, would that be so bad? Less distractions, being more environmentally friendly?
East Whiteland Township is OPPOSED to this new application.
But East Whiteland needs your help, especially but not limited to residents. If you travel this stretch of Route 202 regularly, PLEASE take the time to contact PennDOT and CC: Scott Lambert, Chair of the East Whiteland Township Supervisors. I will provide some lovely email address I have looked up in a moment, but you can also report your concern via their Customer Care Center: https://customercare.penndot.gov/eCCC/eCCC.nsf
YOU MUST BE POLITE AND PROFESSIONAL, NO PROFANITY PLEASE.
At the end I will embed the actual documents I received on a Right to Know. But now a word about billboards as an issue. EVERY SINGLE TIME the issue comes up, the knee jerk response is “get rid of all of the elected officials.”
It’s not that simple, people, and neither should any of you be when it comes to this.
And you know, as well as I do that things with development are not always so simplistic because of the municipalities planning code. Billboards also come in to play with that, because if Pennsylvania had a more strict or defined policy about billboards as a state, it would have a trickle down effect to local zoning, and Pennsylvania kind of looks the other way which is why I am FOR different State Representative representation here for example. State Representative Kristine Howard does not do much of anything and does not have a voice for her constituents. We now have Katie Muth as our State Senator and I don’t know enough about her to have an informed opinion. At this point other than from what I have seen, she does stand up for her constituency, depending upon the issue. Maybe she will show an interest in helping save communities against billboards, or one can only hope.
You all know how I feel about billboards. I’ve never made a secret of it and I’ve been parts of groups fighting billboards since billboards were first proposed around 2010 in Bryn Mawr on Lancaster Avenue.
When billboards first became an issue in East Whiteland, some of the community were all gung ho, and formed a no billboards group. But those people soon fizzled out and didn’t go to meetings they weren’t speaking up and it was just left to a few people. People are not consistent with participating where they live. And everybody has a different reason, but the thing is people have to pay attention to the meetings and the schedules and what’s being submitted and it’s all there as public information. With regard to township meetings you can also attend them on zoom from the comfort of your home. You don’t have to be in person anymore and if you can’t attend them on zoom, you can watch them after on YouTube but people have to participate. Consistently.
Part of the problem is that more residents need to get involved where they live — as in East Whiteland and elsewhere. We can’t blame government for our lack of participation where we live.
When these billboards first came up the threat of the expense of prolonged litigation was real (look at Haverford Township and Lower Merion for real world examples.) This was like the one billboard that the billboard guy really wanted, but he had proposed three, so it was either they were going to accept this one billboard and the other billboards would go away or there would’ve been three like this within a mile and a half to 2 miles. People will have to go back and look at the original submissions. (http://www.eastwhiteland.org/418/E-Whiteland-Outdoor-LLC-Off-Premises-Sig )
Now I will admit that I think they could have said no, but the township felt compromise was in everyone’s best interest. Of course we now know how obnoxious that sign is, so perhaps that sign can be revisited by PennDOT and East Whiteland?
Once again, I ask people to start bombarding state elected officials, including the freaking governor to update the Municipalities Planning Code to protect where we live. It requires them to enact an act of the state constitution to do this, and they’re all too damn lazy to do it and this has to be done in Harrisburg. We need a top down STATE law solution to SAVING our communities from billboard blight.
I just don’t want people throwing the baby out with the bathwater because not all elected officials are bad. And we need to come together on this issue for real. Again.
Here are the documents I have to share below. I am also sharing something from Scenic America. I don’t pretend to have the answers but please contact PennDOT. Time is of the essence. If you have media contacts, please impress upon them to cover this.
Saying NO to billboards IS possible. It doesn’t happen often enough, but it does happen. Phoenixville did it in 2012, remember? And a Chester County Judge upheld that decision in 2014. And special counsel to Phoenixville then is now a judge…Anthony Verwey. And Tredyffrin won their case this year saying NO to a billboard on Lancaster Avenue in Paoli.
Stronger together, people. Fighting billboards is not the purview of any political party. This is a non-partisan we live here but the billboard companies don’t live here kind of an issue. This is purely a We The People thing. Please stand up and be heard.
Together we can save 150 year old trees. Hopefully we can someday save our communities completely from billboard blight. But we can only do that as unified communities across Pennsylvania.
This looks terrible and is it actually dangerous ? This was taken last evening 10:30 PM or there abouts.
A friend asked if PENNDot was going to add strobes to the regular lights like they have on Route 100 so people pay attention to the traffic signals not the billboards? People are afraid of distracted driving accidents and adverse neurological reactions and perhaps that is indeed more than a little justified?
But hey, I never hold out hope on PENNDot. They can’t even add a four way stop on Providence Road and Warren Avenue in Willistown, and God knows the accidents justify it.
These billboards are bullshit. And another thing allowed thanks in part to the Municipalities Planning Code not providing protection for Pennsylvania communities, only developers.
East Whiteland could have gone balls to the wall and said no to billboards, but I don’t think they really could afford to sadly.
But East Whiteland? Time to deal with how this looks and the problems that will occur if not dealt with.
I am amused by all the people who are so oblivious to what goes on where they live that they were surprised this billboard was going up. I am also amused by all the people who said they would fight this particular billboard and then essentially vanished from the issue, like happens with so many issues around. Now I know people will take umbrage at my comments but sometimes residents actually have to actively participate where they live.
Billboards are not about improving communities, only destroying them. They are a monument to ugliness.
Hey Lower Merion Township/Penn Valley/Gladwyne is this your future?
The secret is out. Once again the billboard baron is on the march. A reminder of what they did in East Whiteland Township, Chester County:
Oh and these are the trees they weren’t allowed to take in East Whiteland because residents went to PennDOT:
What has recently been heard regarding East Whiteland is that Catalyst withdrew their application from Penndot not so long ago and something like the billboard site is being sold to yet another billboard company?
And here are more views of current uses of the West Conshohocken sign not really so far away from where they want them in Lower Merion:
Yeah so read what came out from one Lower Merion Township Commissioner, Josh Grimes. And people say the commissioner in Bryn Mawr, Scott Zelov is all for moving the billboards so it now becomes the problem of another area of the township? Pretty obnoxious if true, right? Especially given all of the support other commissioners have gladly provided to him all these years over billboards in Bryn Mawr? Really hope this isn’t true don’t you? I also wonder who he’s using for a lawyer this time? Because unless I am mistaken I believe the lawyer he used and East Whiteland is actually Radnor Commissioner Jack Larkin and I wonder how he would feel if the shoe was on the other foot and they wanted to put billboards in Radnor?
And what’s with the carrot and rabbit psychology by billboard company? Kind of like what they did in East Whiteland, right? Perhaps it’s being done this way in Lower Merion because the objective all along was to get the giant TV billboards on the Schuylkill Expressway? Maybe the billboards should go up at “Maple Hill”? That’s in Gladwyne, right?
So my opinion which I’m entitled to have as I hope lower Merion fights these billboards because just because the man can buy a house in Lower Merion it doesn’t mean Lower Merion should have to be the location for his billboards unless they’re going on his own front lawn, Anyway, here is what Lower Merion residents are now facing:
So….residents weren’t happy, and neither was the township. PennDOT was contacted. Also before all that there was this letter East Whiteland send out this letter:
I do not like billboards, I can’t even pretend to think this abominations to our landscape are okay.
East Whiteland is one of many communities in the region who was in the opinion of residents bullied into billboards.
Start at 14:55
Soooo….you can imagine how upset residents near the site are that the billboard company did some clear cutting of trees etc?? Ummm don’t recall clear cutting in the plan??
Here is a statement from Scott Lambert, Chair of the East Whiteland Board of Supervisors:
A statement pertaining to the Catayst tree removal On the evening of June 30th, a resident with a keen eye notified the Township that extensive tree removal had been performed around the Catalyst billboard site situated along Rt. 202 and Conestoga Road. The resident provided disturbing pictures of the tree’s removal.
Pursuant to previously signed documents with 202 (L)East Whiteland Land Holdings LLC (Catalyst), no trees were to be removed without prior review and approval from the Township. This was a point of extensive conversations during the initial review process and an element of the project which the Board carefully negotiated in order to minimize impact to the site and surrounding properties.
I notified the Board, Staff and Solicitor that I wanted to conduct a site visit Friday morning to view, document, and secure the site from further ecological damage. Despite being a holiday weekend with a skeleton staff, I was joined at 11:15 am by our Codes Department, and our Township Engineers from ARRO – who had a representative drive in from Reading to assist with the information gathering. Members of our Codes Department then notified the Chester County Conservation District and PennDOT of the incident. At the site, we observed topped trees, extensive pruning, and complete removal of trees and vegetation – not only along Little Valley Creek but also on the steep slope areas leading down to the creek from the approved construction area. At this juncture, the township solicitor had not determined if the could be temporarily pulled and all work stopped. We proceeded with an action plan and received a commitment from the Catalyst site manager for the following:
1) No additional tree or vegetation removal would occur until Township approval had been granted
2) All earthwork and debris removal would cease until all stakeholders had input on an ecologically safe removal plan
3) To protect the Creek and stabilize the site to prevent erosion of the now barren slope, especially with the forecasted weekend storms they were to install erosion control devices (such as silt sock) as directed by our Engineer by the end of the day (This was completed).
4) All engineer costs related to this issue beginning immediately are to be paid by Catalyst.
Following the initial site visit, the Township hired an arborist to assess the physical damage to the trees and determine the potential monetary value of the trees that were trimmed or removed.
On Friday July 11th, the Board of Supervisors, our Solicitor and Staff met to discuss our response and on July 12th the Township sent a notice of default to Catalyst pursuant to the terms of the lease .
The township provided Catalyst with six conditions that must be met to cure (remove)the default, including a $151,000 penalty, plus an additional $15,000 for expenses incurred by the Township. Additional details regarding the conditions of the cure were read into the record during the Board of Supervisors meeting on July 13th. Should the conditions not be met, and payment not made by September 12th, the lease is terminated and the Township will demand Catalyst remove the sign at their expense will be found in default and will be terminated.
More information on this subject is available by viewing the July 13 2022 EWT Board of Supervisors meeting
~ scott lambert chair of east whiteland board of supervisors regarding the clear cutting by catalyst/east whiteland outdoor
I will update this post with the meeting video when it is available. In the interim take a good look at those photos. Way to go East Whiteland Outdoor LLC, way to extra stick it to the community and now what? I hear East Whiteland Township isn’t pleased either, are they?
