An illustration showing how the proposed digital billboard would look. (Photo by Brian Donohue. Click to enlarge.)
By BRIAN DONOHUE
The Red Bank zoning board unanimously rejected an advertising company’s proposal to replace a 60-year old billboard with a digital billboard at the town’s northern gateway a plan Thursday night.
The vote ended a saga that stretched out over three three-hour hearings one the past 11 months and included staunch opposition from neighbors and Red Bank Rivercenter, the non-profit which manages the downtown business improvement district.
The proposal went down in flames after testimony by opponents and comments by board members themselves describing it variously as “heinous,” “awful,” “a nightmare,” and a feature that would, “turn Red Bank into the laughing stock of the area.”
A comparison photo submitted by Outlook Media showing the current billboard.
Jennifer Krimko, the attorney representing applicant Outfront Media LLC had argued the new billboard did not need a variance for a new use because they were not building something new, but simply upgrading an existing billboard that existed before the borough banned them.
Krimko repeatedly implied over the course of testimony that she was building a record for lawsuit against the town if the application was denied.
“It looks like maybe a judge will decide,” she said at one point in the testimony.
The unanimous vote ended what the board’s engineer Edward Herman called “probably the single more challenging application I’ve faced” in more than a decade, due to the thicket of legal and engineering issues involved.
In January, Outfront proposed a 27-foot high digital billboard facing southbound drivers as they enter the town from Cooper’s Bridge. The plan was a scaled-down version of a 40-foot-high display Outfront had proposed in February 2023.
The structure would replace an existing 60-year-old billboard on the vacant gas station site at 187 Riverside Avenue.
Its display area would be ten percent smaller than the current sign but it would be five feet higher and shifted slightly west toward Route 35 Christine Cofone, a professional planner representing Outfront testified.
And in exchange for an approval, the company offered to eliminate six static billboards they own at two nearby locations on Shrewsbury Avenue and Oakland Street. They also offered to turn the sign off between 11 pm and 7 am, and offer eight minutes an hour to display community messages free of charge.
Krimko and an Outfront engineer said unlike the existing sign, “narrow view technology” would limit the display’s visibility to people viewing it straight-on.
“In every level we are reducing the intensity,” she said.
A billboard on Oakland Street that would have been removed as part of the proposed swap.
Outfront needed variances because billboards are not permitted anywhere in town. Nearly two dozen exist, however, under laws that ‘grandfather’ uses that predate the ban.
In the end, Outfront’s arguments could not overcome concerns that the billboard would distract drivers, set an unwanted precedent and accentuate an eyesore at the gateway to town planners already consider blighted.
Board members rejected the argument that the new sign was merely a renovation, agreeing that an LED display, taller sign with motion and displays changing every eight seconds was an entirely new use that required a specific so called D1 variance.
Holding up a paper copy of the meeting agenda in one hand and a smart phone displaying the agenda in the other, board Member Chris Havens said: “That’s the analogy you are talking about.They are not the same thing.”
And that new use, the board seemed to agree, was one the town clearly does not want at the gateway to town.
The 2023 Master Plan called the area around the foot of Cooper’s Bridge both “an unsightly entryway into Red Bank” and a “hot spot” for crashes.
Victor Rallo, owner of adjacent Birravino restaurant (pictured below) argued that approving the billboard would prevent the former gas station property from being redeveloped.
Rallo said he was under contract to purchase the gas station property but dropped the plan after realizing the terms of Outfront’s long-term lease would have prevented him from building anything that blocks the view of the billboard. Any other prospective developer, confronted with the lease terms, coupled with the costs of cleaning up environmental contamination on the site, will likely walk away.
Developer Jay Herman agreed that approving the billboard would ensure both the sign and the decrepit state of the property would become a permanent feature and turn the town into a “laughingstock.”
“If this gets approved, that electronic sign is going to be there for the rest of all of our lives,” he said.
Krimko, the Outfront attorney cited case law arguing that a D1 new use variance was not needed at all. She cited an appellate court decision in a similar case in which a judge ruled a digital sign was the same thing as a static billboard requiring a lower zoning hurdle.
“I understand that you might not like digital signs, And I understand you might not think it’s going to be attractive,” she said. “But when you took the oath of office you swore to uphold the laws of the state of New Jersey.”
Before casting his “no’ vote, Board Member Paul Cagno dismissed Krimko’s argument.
“One thing that is perfectly clear is the borough does not want billboards,”‘ he said. “We can make these decisions for our town.”
redbankgreen editor Brian Donohue may be reached via email at [email protected] or by calling or texting 848-331-8331 or yelling his name loudly as he walks by. Do you value the news coverage provided by redbankgreen? Please become a financial supporter if you haven’t already. Click here to set your own level of monthly or annual contribution.
