Because commercial strips occur along major arteries and are seen regularly by the public, they have a substantial impact on the visual image of the city. Unfortunately, this impact is often negative. Herzog, Kaplan, and Kaplan (1976), for example, found that for five categories of urban scene (cultural, contemporary, commercial, entertainment, and campus), people most disliked scenes of commercial strips. Similarly, residents and visitors most frequently cited roadside commercial strips as visually blighted areas in a city (Nasar, 1979).

Clearly, urban commercial strips produce visual overload (Rapoport and Hawkes, 1970), and a major factor contributing to this overload is the signscape (i.e., the multiplicity of signs that the viewer can comprehend in a single view). In a study of public responses to commercial scenes from which various features had been removed, Winkel, Malek, and Theil (1970) found that signs were highly noticeable; and when Nasar (1979) asked the public to describe the physical elements that most reduced visual quality, people most frequently cited signs and billboards.

The sign problem is similar to the tragedy of the commons (Hardin, 1968). What seems beneficial to each individual alone is detrimental to all the individuals together – the community. With signs, each merchant attempting to call attention to his or her establishment seeks a distinctive sign that presents a desirable image and stands out from the surroundings. When seen alone, each sign may present a favorable image and attract attention; but when many such signs are placed side by side, the result is often chaos.