Wednesday, March 7th, 2007 ::: Audits of By-Law Enforcement
1 comment

In today’s Audit By-Law Enforcement, we look at MLS’s bungled investigation of the illegal CBS roof sign at Harbord and Manning Ave; we see how this sign is a great example of a typical illegal roof sign; and how it gives us a lesson on why no third party signs should be permitted as-of-right.

In December 2005, we asked Deputy Mayor Joe Pantalone if he knew anything about these signs. We thought he might since the billboards are across the street from the Deputy Mayor’s old high school, Harbord Collegiate , for which he was, fatefully, Student Council President.

“I know nothing about these signs” said Joe. “My staff will have Municipal Licensing and Standards investigate. Problem is, the system for illegal signs is broken.” Well, he was right about that because in Feb. 2006, MLS reported to Pantalone’s office, that the signs were legal, a permit “for these billboards” having been issued in March 1996. They aren’t legal, although a permit was issued in March 1996.

This is what the billboards look like; they are illuminated, double-sided and visible from inside residences on Palmerston, Euclid, Manning and Clinton and from inside classrooms at HCI:

This is engineer Len Maile’s diagram, which was was approved under permit 96-382006, issued in March 1996 to Gould Outdoor, a Pattison company:

This structure was designed for two ad-faces. The diagram (which looks north, unlike the photo which looks south) shows that Pattison had originally applied for a double-faced, illuminated sign. The zoning examiner then made Pattison amended the plan by deleting the westerly face and the lights in order to comply with the in-force signs by-law (the initials “gc” that you see on the plan, are those of Gino Colarusso, Director of Operations, Pattison). So the westerly face and the lights are illegal – the sign has been illegally upgraded. When MLS did their investigation for the Deputy Mayor’s office, MLS didn’t bother to check the plan, they never do. They wouldn’t even know how to read a plan.

Here’s where it gets a little interesting. A roof sign was first erected at 533 Manning in 1969, under permit 3431, issued to Leo H. West – this 1969 sign was a non-illuminated, easterly facing sign.

The new permit, the March 1996 permit, was issued at a time when roof signs in CR zones were outlawed, but a provision existed in the Former Toronto signs by-law that allowed advertising companies to replace existing, legal non-conforming roof sign structures with new sign structures, as-of-right, so long as the size, orientation or attributes of the sign were not changed. This provision was in place to allow companies to replace decaying sign structures. What actually happened is that advertising companies used this provision to replace old signs, that were not decaying at all, with new sign structures that were specifically designed to be easily upgraded – upgraded illegally that is. 533 Manning is a perfect example of this.

Here is the diagram (looking north) of the old 1969 sign:

This structure was designed for one ad-face. Such a structure simply does not lend itself to attaching an extra face. As we noted, Pattison’s new structure was designed for two faces – in fact Pattison tried to get away with getting a permit for both faces, as Pattison falsely suggested in the permit documents that a double-faced sign was approved under the 1969 permit; but the zoning examiner noticed the 1969 sign only had one face and no lights and made Pattison delete the other face and the illumination from the plans. Sadly, some examiners aren’t so diligent – we believe that scores of ad faces have been granted illegal permits by zoning errors.

The vast majority of triple or quadruple-faced roof signs in Toronto have been illegally upgraded in a similar manner. Almost every permit that has every been granted to replace an existing legal non-conforming or conforming third party sign was issued to an advertising company which obtained the permit for the purpose of facilitating illegal signage upgrades.

Even today, the Toronto signs by-law allows fascia signs in CR zones and ground and roof signs in industrial zones that are not located within 60M of other signs, to be replaced with new structures with a permit that Buildings must issue over the counter. Signs by-laws that are currently in place in York and North York still allow some legal-non-conforming signs to be replaced with new structures as-of-right. Advertising companies are proceeding apace with this strategy all over town although most of the signs that could be illegally upgraded have already been illegally upgraded.

Such illegal signage upgrades are one of the key reasons why half the billboards in this town are illegal. This rampant abuse is a good reason to outlaw all as-of-right permits for billboards, for both replacement signs new sites. In other words, the only way to stop this abuse is to ban billboards under the signs by-law altogether.

Note: Pattison sold the sign at 533 Manning to Astral Media. Astral in turn sold it to CBS sometime in 2006.

Diagrams: Len Maile, 1996; Leo H. West 1969