political nasty season has completely bloomed in east whiteland….

Yeah so I guess we know what the big “rally” was for in Burke Park last evening was for, right? To vomit their uniparty lawn signs right? Is this the work of good old Jerry and Bill or others? Not that the East Whiteland Republicans are showing any additional intelligence on this issue compared to the Great Valley Democrats who are out burning shoe leather more than kids playing ding dong ditch.

These people are even depositing signs on church lawns which of course could but a church’s non-profit status in jeopardy.

They are also putting them in right of ways blocking sight lines. But what do I expect? Not much.

Now, if you were not convinced that voting for two more supervisors was the right thing already, look no further than these screenshots below to know that you ARE doing the right thing. And why does she care that people care enough about their community to try and enact POSITIVE change?

As we have seen recently, both political parties in East Whiteland are seeming to be aligned against representative democracy, and then you have this woman saying that if you’re against a data center or you want two more supervisors, you’re just NIMBY? I mean for real? The Huddler is a wee bit obvious isn’t she?


At least one particular Supervisor from East Whiteland Township is a top contributors in her group, correct? So what’s that phrase in the Bible about Beware the false prophets?

Oh wait here it is:


Matthew 7:15: Jesus warns, “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves.”

Anyway, she’s always going to do her and I’m always going to do me. If people don’t vote next week to choose yes on the ballot referendum for two more supervisors then guess what? This township gets the representation residents deserve. It is that simple.

And don’t believe both political parties when they tell you that people aren’t interested in being supervisors because they are.

The fact that both political parties are kicking up such a fuss tells you that it’s time to do this. It doesn’t get any more simplistic than that.

And if some woman who’s not that much further away from where the data center will be wants to say that people who don’t want the data center are NIMBY and people who want five supervisors are NIMBY should simply make you wonder what does she get out of it for saying so? I mean besides atta girls for sucking up to the township? Is she bucking for public information officer?

This woman certainly does not get the admiration of her neighbors does she? Someone should drive one of those trucks that play data center sounds up and down her street. She would change her tune quickly in my humble opinion.

Now in case the screen shots show fuzzy wherever you read this blog here is the verbiage verbatim:

OCTOBER 23, 2026:

A different point of view on the people behind the data center activism and why our township now needs to spend money to combat the barrage of attacks and misleading information.

Our current BOS mostly ran uncontested and were elected. They are not politicians. They are our neighbors.
Our neighbors!
Who raised their hand to help.
Did you? Did your raise your hand to help?
Think about that before you sh*t post about the very few people who actually cared enough to do this ”.job” on top of their real job and in addition to all of the other responsibilities in their life. They chose to represent and help our township for no other reason than service to our community.
Can you say the same? Have you helped our township? How? Have you run for a BOS position?
The data says no. Yet, when a NIMBY issue comes up, people suddenly care.

Now the August post:

AUGUST 3rd, 2026:

The discussion around increasing the BOS from 3 to 5 people has come up from time to time in the past. To date, most of the elected positions have run unopposed. The township could barely get 3 people to run out of almost 15,000 residents.

The recent scramble to try to increase to 5 people, simply because of the data center issue, gives me pause. It’s a NIMBY excuse to get involved. Would the people suddenly interested in running care about everything else in the township? I’m skeptical.
The interest now is too little too late in my opinion. The contaminated sites in our township are not new issues. Neither are the discussions about what to build on them or next to them. And if everyone cares about open space they should have gotten involved a decade or more ago.
There are brand new townhomes in Anfield next to an old landfill selling for nearly $1 M. Atwater was built next to a dangerous quarry lake. The new development on Flat Rd was placed on risky sinkhole land next to an active quarry. Many homes are across from ugly commercial properties in
EW. And the prices don’t go down. The development in the county was purposefully planned to be in EW to save open space in other townships.
It would be nice to have five BOS seats filled with people who truly care about the entire township.
But knowing the constant harassment that comes with occupying elected roles here, who in their right mind would run? And why? Ask why!
Thank you to the three brave people on the BOS, out of 15,000, who raised their hand to help. You cared before you had to and I appreciate your service. If you get two more to join you, I hope they are joining for the right reasons.

Shall we also say with SHE (The Huddler) gives a lot of us pause? The way she is so trivial about contaminated land in East Whiteland Township and someone told me she is a breast cancer survivor? As a breast cancer survivor personally, I can’t quite fathom that.

The interest now is too little too late in my opinion. The contaminated sites in our township are not new issues. ~ The Huddler August 2026

She calls people who don’t want a data center NIMBY? She calls people who wish to expand the board of supervisors NIMBY?

She does a lot of talking, mostly out of her backside. (And what does she not get that supervisors ARE politicians?)

She talks about uncontested supervisor races. Actually not all were, but the last time the East Whiteland Republicans ran a winning candidate was Rich Orlow. Rich was then beaten by quite a lot by Scott Lambert (838 to 560) who did the work and went door knocking. I do not even remember him being extra supported by Great Valley Democrats back then but to his credit, he did the work.

Interesting political history is when Bill Holmes initially ran, he ran against Rich Orlow. He only won 911 to 903. (When he ran in 2013 Holmes only defeated Maureen Martinez by ten votes – 892 to her 882. She would have made a terrific supervisor by the way.)

So anyway, Bill Holmes stepped off of the board of East Whiteland Township Supervisors around the same time Brian McGinnis did (now we won’t get into his other issues and feud with Bill Holmes’ pal Michele Vaughn) – they both worked for Vanguard back then. But then Rich Orlow, formerly a Republican, switched political parties from Republican to Democrat to complete Bill Holmes’ term and then stayed in office until 2025 I guess it was when he retired…as a Democrat and Clinton Smith became the third supervisor.

Sorry don’t mean to meander, but context is important when looking at the big picture of nasty East Whiteland politics this year, right? Also interesting to note that Bill Holmes never did prevail by sweeping margins did he? Again…The Huddler talks about people running unopposed and that has not quite been true, just in a lot of cases the East Whiteland Republicans literally ran any body they could prop up like whatever the guy’s name was who ran against Clinton Smith last year. Oh wait, I looked it up – George Sabo who lost to Clinton Smith – Smith votes were 2991 and Sabo votes were 1232. Sabo was a nothing burger so he tanked and truthfully the Republicans didn’t go out of their way for him did they?

So The Huddler wants to paint the boogie man picture of it’s so bad to add two more seats? On what planet? To quote the little website (https://www.eastwhitelandseats.com/) the resident spearheading this initiative put up:

Increasing from a 3-member to a 5-member board of supervisors provides broader geographic representation, prevents power concentrations, changes how majority votes work, and distributes workload.

Then there is the reality: East Whiteland has just shy of 15,000 residents. Easttown has a little over 11,000 residents and 5 supervisors. East Brandywine has a little over 10,000 residents and 5 supervisors. Schuylkill has just shy of 9,000 residents and 5 supervisors. Charlestown (another municipal neighbor) has just over 6,000 residents and 5 supervisors. And this has not been a recent occurrence.

So can we be honest and say that residents waking up to the data center was a motivator to add two more supervisors which is allowed under the 2nd class township code? I mean D’OH of course it was but it is not the only reason or motivator. Elected officials shape how a municipality moves forward, correct? East Whiteland residents have felt let down over more than just a data center. Look at other things like Bishop Tube for example and other developments and even billboards where they felt helpless and powerless, right?

This vote has not and never will be about either major political party. It is about residents NOT feeling heard and wanting more representation given how East Whiteland has grown over the years. I even heard that former supervisor Rich Orlow signed the petition to get this referendum on the ballot? This ballot is about how we are governed in the future. That is not up to the political parties, it is up to us.

But the political parties in East Whiteland, the uniparty uniquely similar to Pat the former Saturday Night Live character, is objecting to this. So here we live in a purported democracy with our two pillar political parties literally objecting to representative democracy?

They want to tell you it’s money and being able to find qualified candidates. Well if they were truly concerned about money would they be popping up with lawn signs against the referendum? The answer is no.

Can it be hard to find candidates? Sure but in my opinion in East Whiteland that mostly has to do with the parties themselves. East Whiteland Republicans seem to still love their MAGA events with their not so cute hats and cheap purses, but they have not really put a lot of effort into candidates for YEARS have they? Great Valley Democrats run their party like a little social club meets the middle school lunch table and either you are in or you are out and heaven forbid you don’t do what you are told every minute of the day, correct? In order to break their cycles of bad, there needs to be change pure and simple.

The chair of the East Whiteland Republicans at present has told people they are against 2 more supervisors because they are going to take the board back over in it’s entirety and what planet does she live on? All of the supervisors are not even on the same cycle.

But hey they love their memes:

So yeah that’s who the Great Valley Democrats are in bed with in East Whiteland to defeat this referendum which makes me 1000% question them.

Interestingly enough, both the East Whiteland Republicans and Great Valley Democrats are both working hard on their socials to NOT show they both have sample ballots and signs that are AGAINST the referendum.

The Great Valley Democrats view the referendum as a threat to their power structure and control don’t they? After all look at one of the loudest voices that unctuous old turd former vice chair of the Chester County Democrats Jerry Pyne who was also assistant zone leader, zone leader in the Great Valley Democrat of it all? (He can still be found on the Chesco Dems website as Vice Chair although he is not https://chescodems.org/teams/jerry-pyne/)

Pyne is also the Vacancy Board Chair at present in East Whiteland. The Vacancy Board Chair acts as an independent or neutral tie-breaker if the Board of Supervisors fails to fill a vacant seat on the board within the statutory timeframe mandated by Pennsylvania second-class township code. Yeah that potential power trip gets VASTLY diminished if there are 5 supervisors, doesn’t it? And whom do I think he would appoint if something were to happen on the 3 member board? In my opinion, former supervisor Bill Holmes, the other ardent data center admirer and hate of representative democracy…and I can have that opinion and it’s not so far fetched considering, is it?

The Huddler loves to stir the pot. Full disclosure? She will insert herself when it suits her to raise her own profile and I can also have that opinion because it is not the first time is it? I mean seriously, what will she get out of being cheerleader for these issues? Certainly not community respect right? I mean what did she actually do on parks and rec?

I will note that I used to help out the Great Valley School District Education Foundation for a while as a volunteer on some of their things they were putting out, but I just did it quietly and without fanfare as a favor to someone involved there at the time. I help out with lots of things here and there quietly, that is paying it forward and being a true part of a community and extended community. The Huddler doesn’t get that IMHO, does she?

Criticizing residents for wanting better for their communities and calling them NIMBY is as old as politics in general. It’s neither new nor original. It’s not NIMBY to care, but it is being a righteous bitch for saying that about the people where you live. And she thinks all of the development is ok?

There are people interested in running for supervisor. And I believe if people are smart and vote YES on the referendum in East Whiteland more will follow.

As https://www.eastwhitelandseats.com/ website says, board size alone does not guarantee better decisions. Preparation, transparency, responsiveness, and resident participation matter with three supervisors or five. But the reality is we can’t continue as we have been so why not try something different that works well in municipalities both larger and smaller than East Whiteland?

Today is the last Friday before election day. If you care in East Whiteland you will tune out the narcissistic and opportunistic mosquitoes and vote YES on the ballot referendum to add two more supervisors. Just my opinion of course, but it is what I did proudly when I cast my vote (which is already in and counted.)

In order to make an omlette, sometimes you have to break some eggs. This is no different. Change is not always easy but it is derived from common sense isn’t it? Be peaceful and vote YES on Tuesday.

“monument” to ugliness looks bedraggled and messy in 2025

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.

https://patch.com/pennsylvania/malvern/east-whiteland-discuss-lancaster-avenue-electronic-billboards

https://www.eastwhiteland.org/418/Off–Premises-Signs-Electronic-Billboard

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.

https://www.eastwhiteland.org/DocumentCenter/View/3464/Letter-to-Melissa-Noyes-10-3-2022-03660984x9DAE0

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.

For that, residents rose up and stayed with the issue. It showed results. Citizen outcry combined with East Whiteland Township resulted in PennDOT getting seriously pissy with the billboard company.

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.

billboard issue not dead in bryn mawr

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?

From 2009

https://casetext.com/case/adsmart-outdoor-adver-inc-v-adsmart-outdoor-adver-inc

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. 

Laura Cavender, 5th Ward Commissioner
lcavender@havtwp.org
202-415-9881

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.

#NoBillboardsInTheBurbs

#NoBillboards

#BillboardsSuck

nothing says “going out of business” like a giant billboard ad….

Yeah Wayne Jewelers, we see you.

Not a good look.

no is my favoirite billboard word

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.

Nighty night

it’s not times square in nyc jeff d’ambrosio…it’s malvern.

Dear Jeff D’Ambrosio,

Congratulations you can be seen from space.

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.

#billboards=blight

#nomorebillboardblight

oh goody another billboard application for east whiteland said NO resident ever….

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.

Email addresses:

Scott Lambert, Chair East Whiteland Supervisors: slambert@eastwhiteland.org

Slifer, Joanne: joslifer@pa.gov

Altemose, Darren: daaltemose@pa.gov

Wilcox, Owen: owilcox@pa.gov

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.

From 2020: Billboard Battle Rages in Bryn Mawr

https://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/billboard-battle-rages-in-bryn-mawr/2272642/

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.

https://law.justia.com/cases/pennsylvania/commonwealth-court/2023/1305-c-d-2021.html

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.

#billboards=blight

#nomorebillboards

#savethetrees

we knew this billboard was coming and can it be seen from space ?

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 residents, is this your billboard future?

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?

Please visit Daily Mail to read article

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:

file under “catalyst” for change: my goodness east whiteland, it looks like penndot spanked the billboard baron?

In July, I wrote about the clear cutting of a billboard site that essentially wasn’t supposed to happen that way. See:

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:

Now before I get to today’s lovely news, I spied a familiar name to Radnor Township residents on that letter above. Jack/John Larkin Esquire. Is he not the Vice President of the Radnor Township Board of Commissioners??? Anyway, just politically interesting.

So here we are at the end of August and guess what? PennDOT actually acted. Catalyst or East Whiteland Outdoor LLC seems to have gotten spanked?

Hmmmm this is getting interesting again. “Notice of Intent to Revoke Permit”? My my my.

Oh and Willistown residents? No storming of the Bastille or inciting a riot was necessary.