At 64 Merton Street, Pattison Builds a Pillar on the Sidewalk
These two Pattison signs have an interesting history. They are located at 62 Merton Street. There is a 4-sided pedestal sign and a 10′x20′ ground sign.
The signs are located on Merton Street across the street from residences. On the south side of Merton street, there are parking lots, on the north side, residences. When these signs were built in 1995, the residents complained to the local councillor. Rather than investigate the legality of the two signs, the City Planning Department wrote a new by-law prohibiting any more ground and pedestal signs from being built on Merton Street’s parking lots. That by-law was duly passed by City Council on November 6, 1995.
After the residents complained, Pattison was requested to, and agreed to, install a light deflector on the 10′x20′ ground sign. The light deflector is still there:
In any case, City officials didn’t notice that the signs are required by their permits to be setback from the property line by two feet. The pedestal sign is in fact built on the road allowance. Here is a better view of the pedestal sign which shows it is on the public right of way:
In the map below, the pink line represents the property line for 64 Merton Street. The yellow line represents the outline of the building. Notice that the pink line and the yellow line are almost on top of each other in front of 64 Merton. This means that there is no setback between the property line and the building, which means that Pattison built their sign on public property, not setback by 2 feet, as required.
The 10′x20′ ground sign also fails to comply with setback. But the ground sign can be moved back to comply. The pedestal sign cannot be built legally without destroying its visibility.
When the City objected to the illumination of these signs, Pattison argued that the light coming from their illegal pedestal sign was illuminated by “soft light” and then agreed not to build another pedestal and ground sign on Merton Street for which it already obtained permits, due to the City’s objections and the new by-law.
Now, they will lose their pedestal sign and they will have to move their ground sign back a few feet.
March 12th, 2008 at 12:19 am
Was Walker the councillor in 1995, or was that Anne Johnston territory?
Walker was pretty active opposing billboard liberalization back in the day, but I don ‘t know who had jurisdiction over this one. -Rami