Lamar Advertising won't be flashing messages any time soon on its proposed electronic billboard Downtown.

Allegheny County Common Pleas Judge Joseph M. James on Wednesday upheld the city Zoning Hearing Board's decision to deny the controversial billboard that has been a lightning rod for more than two years.

The billboard, which initially was approved administratively with no public hearing process, led to the resignation of the head of the city Urban Redevelopment Authority and a flurry of lawsuits over how it was handled.

Neither Lamar executives nor the company's attorney could be reached for comment on whether the company will appeal the decision or remove the partially installed billboard.

Lamar had already begun work on the 19-by-58-foot LED sign, expected to cost upwards of $1 million, at the new Grant Street Transportation Center when the project was stopped by complaints. The center, featuring two parking garages and the Greyhound bus terminal at Grant Street and Liberty Avenue, is owned by the Pittsburgh Parking Authority.

Although the billboard would be larger than the limits for signs located Downtown, Lamar initially received over-the-counter approval for the billboard. The company said it was relying on what it considered a long-standing city policy allowing advertising companies to install an electronic billboard if it agreed to eliminate several vinyl boards.

The parking authority had approved it, too, but the project became controversial when it was revealed that URA executive director and parking authority member Pat Ford was friends with a top Lamar executive with whom he and his wife exchanged Christmas gifts.

As a compromise to end a series of lawsuits, Lamar agreed to stop the project and apply for permission to install the billboard through normal channels. After an extensive hearing before the zoning hearing board, the board voted 1-1 with one abstention on Dec. 19, effectively denying the project.

The decision also denied a 2.5-by-433-foot "ticker" scheduled for the face of the facility.

Lamar went to Common Pleas Court to challenge whether that split decision should act as a denial. Judge James ruled it should.

"It is well established in this Commonwealth that a tie vote of a governmental body constitutes a negative decision rather than the absence of a decision," he wrote.

Since the board held a proper hearing, there was no legal reason to overturn the 17-page decision written by board member Alice Mitinger, he said.

The controversy surrounding the billboard led to Mr. Ford's resignation from the URA and parking authority and raised questions about developers having undue influence on Mayor Luke Ravenstahl's administration.

Ms. Mitinger, whose term expired at the end of 2008, continued to serve on the board until she was replaced by the mayor this week.