5 Responses to “Gallery Place advertising”


Read below or add a comment...

  1. Billy Mitchell

    I’d rather see pictures of Gilbert Arenas gracing the Phone Booth than an ad for some crummy GI Joe movie.

  2. David

    The issue here is that many residents prefers sterile over that which they cannot control.

    Think about this: many of us have art on the walls of our home. But we may prefer blanks walls over having art picked by someone else we don’t know put on our walls.

  3. tom veil

    For me, the problem isn’t the content of the ads, it’s the video and audio. If it were up to me, even the TV screen outside Verizon that constantly blares Comcast Sports Network would be shut down. I don’t think that there’s a place for outdoor amplified sound anywhere in a city.

  4. Jason

    Gallery Place retail took a great deal of creativity to finance. The promise of ad revenue streams was likely an important piece. The condo bylaws were crafted in a way that gave buyers notice that more ads could be added over time. If the ads conform to city guidelines and do not produce noise or excessive light pollution into residences then the argument against is frivolous. To me no one downtown is entitled to “their” view being preserved.

  5. Dan Augusto

    I can understand the condo owners concern, but would the condo owners prefer blocks upon blocks of sterile Brutalist boxes with no ground floor retail or advertising?

    Building an entertainment district in DC, ala Times Square, Picadilly Circus in London, etc. will only enhance values, not decrease them.