By ALEX ROSE
@arosedelco

A Delaware County Common Pleas Court judge this week upheld a March 2011 decision from the Springfield Township Zoning Hearing Board that put the kibosh on six large billboards that had been proposed for Baltimore Pike.

“We’re very pleased with the decision,” said attorney Jim Byrne, who represented the township during the two-year billboard battle. “The board of commissioners has been opposed to this application and has unanimously supported the idea of defending the case and spent the money on the witnesses and things that we needed to make a good record.”

Springfield’s zoning ordinance specifically prohibits “outdoor advertising billboards.” Thaddeus Bartkowski III, owner of Bartkowski Investment Group and Catalyst Outdoor Advertising, filed an application with the township in December 2008 seeking the erection of six 672-square-foot signs in the 100, 500, 700 and 800 blocks of Baltimore Pike.

Bartkowski made similar proposals in Haverford, Marple and Newtown. All of them were shot down.

An alternative proposal for a two-sided digital sign is pending before the Newtown Zoning Board.

The Springfield Zoning Board denied BIG’s application after two years and 16 rounds of hearings that included a slew of expert testimony on both sides of the issue. The investment group appealed the decision the following May, arguing the ordinance imposed an unconstitutional ban on a legitimate land use.

Judge Chad F. Kenney Sr. wrote in his opinion that Pennsylvania courts use a two-step process to determine a validity challenge to a zoning ordinance.

First, they must determine whether the challenging party can over overcome the presumed constitutionality of an ordinance by showing it excludes billboards as a use. If so, the courts must decide if the municipality has shown the regulation is substantially related to public health, safety, morality or welfare.

The zoning board argued the billboard prohibition did not restrict other types of outdoor advertising and was therefore constitutional. But the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has ruled that a blanket prohibition on billboards cannot pass constitutional muster without legitimate justification.

The board claimed the prohibition was a legitimate use of the township’s “police powers” in that billboards could create a slew of public safety problems, including distracting drivers along the heavily traveled four-lane section of Baltimore Pike. Continued…

According to the opinion, there are 15 intersections, 112 driveways, 27 pedestrian crossings, 19 bus stops and eight bus shelters along the 1.3 miles of Baltimore Pike where the billboards had been proposed.

The board also cited possible collapses from wind gusts, potential criminal activity taking place on the billboards, and conflicts with the township’s comprehensive plan that includes a pedestrian-friendly “Green Boulevard Plan.”

Kenney found there was substantial evidence to back up the board’s determination to deny the application on those grounds and affirmed the board’s decision.

Attorneys for BIG could not be reached for comment Saturday.

Byrne said the investment group could appeal the decision to the Commonwealth Court, in which case the township would “absolutely” continue to oppose the proposal.