At 25 Burnside Drive Historic Aerial Photos Disprove CBS Outdoor’s Affidavit
This Audit of By-Law Enforcement focuses on these two illegal CBS Outdoor billboards at Bathurst and Davenport:
The signs are located at 25 Burnside Drive, which is a small piece of land that used to be part of 31 Burnside Drive. After the lots were severed, CBS Outdoor’s predecessor company, Mediacom, purchased the lot.
On November 8, 2005, David Meslin of the Toronto Public Space Committee filed a complaint about these signs. On January 11, 2006, this Notice of Violation was issued against Viacom/CBS Outdoor requiring CBS to remove the signs within 14 days:
A few weeks later, on January 27, 2006, CBS Outdoor’s solicitor wrote this letter [PDF] to Municipal Licensing and Standards claiming that the signs were built in the 1950s and even if they didn’t obtain a permit they are legal:
Not quite relying upon his quoted precedent, the solicitor also asks for time to conduct research into the sign.
On January 31, 2006, MLS informs Gowlings that it will give CBS until the end of March 2006 to conduct their research.
On August 2, 2006, another Notice of Violation was issued against the sign. In September 2006, Municipal Licensing and Standards made arrangements with Stan Johnson & Sons to have the signs removed. According to the MLS officer’s notes, Stan Johnson & Sons required the hydro to be disconnected from the illuminated billboards before removing the structures.
On September 26, 2006, MLS informed the Toronto Public Space Committee that the signs are in the process of being removed by the City’s contractor:
On October 2, 2006, CBS’s solicitor writes to MLS claiming that the sign may have been built in the 1950s under a permit number “2-9531″:
As evidence of the permit, CBS submitted this document, via fax on December 14, 2006:
On December 21, 2006, Municipal Licensing and Standards wrote back to CBS Outdoor [PDF] stating that the document CBS submitted “is wholly lacking in detail,” but MLS then gave CBS until January to bring forward more evidence:
In response, Stephen McGregor of CBS Outdoor submits this affidavit [PDF] in which he lies and states that “these signboards have been in place since 1951″
McGregor submits leases which show that revenue was paid for signs on the property dating back to 1951. McGregor never produces a permit. McGregor also never produces any evidence that the signs were legal-conforming in 1951, or that they passed Building Code review; or any evidence, except his own word, that the signs that exist today are the same signs that were there in 1951.
On October 12, 2006, a meeting was held at the First Canadian Place offices of CBS Outdoor’s solicitors. These are the notes of the MLS officer present:
Met with Mr. Graham solicitor and Steven McGregor of CBS Outdoor at 1st Canadian Place, Suite 1600, 100 King St. West… Discussed 2 ground sign at above location….[2-9531] is not a file no. which City Records. File no 2-9531 is addressed to 20 Lawnhurst Boulevard, Ontario Outdoor Krotchick…Mr Graham suggested three possible solutions. 1) Buy the property, 2) Find another location for sign and 3) litigation.
According to research conducted by IllegalSigns.ca and the Toronto Public Space Committee, a single sign was illegally built at this location in 1951. The 1951 sign could not obtain a building permit on account of the residential zoning of the lot and the in-force zoning by-law which prohibited large signs in residential zones.
In addition, that 1951 billboard has no relation to the signs that currently exist on this property.
Sometime between 1963 and 1964 the billboard that was built in 1951 was removed and replaced with two smaller signs. That 1963-64 construction was also illegal — permits were not obtained on account of the residential zoning of the lot and the zoning by-law. Those two smaller signs built in 1963/4 are what you see at 25 Burnside today.
These historic aerial images, which were obtained from the City of Toronto Archives at 255 Spadina Road, indicate that the sign that existed at this location in 1963 was removed and replaced with two smaller signs:
The two smaller signs can seen on aerial images up to the present; the larger sign visible in the 1963 photo can be seen on aerial images back to 1951. You can make out an image of the 1951 sign the left side of this 1955 photograph, which is in the Public Library’s archives.
We are asking Municipal Licensing and Standards to re-open their investigation of this file on the following basis:
- Stephen McGregor of CBS Outdoor submitted false information in his affidavit when he stated that “these signboards have been in place” since 1951; aerial photographs prove the board that was built in 1951 was then removed and replaced by two smaller signs.
- The signs were non-conforming in both 1951 and 1963-64 on account of the residential zoning of the lot, and the signs therefore do not enjoy the protection afforded to non-conforming signs under the signs by-law. The zoning by-laws in force in 1951 and 1963-64 for Bathurst and Davenport did not permit such signs to be built in residential zones.
We will keep you informed.
December 9th, 2008 at 10:08 am
Well done!
December 11th, 2008 at 10:35 am
Is the advertising industry completely filled with immature bigots?
December 11th, 2008 at 10:40 am
Iam a landlord that has a billboard on my roof, with that said i would like to ask rami what is the point to all his effort. Do you have a problem with the billboard companys in general or are you just against all outdoor advertising? I could understand if you dont agree with the amount of outdoor ads . but If your concer is pollution of public space whyshould the city be allowed to advertise on very street corner(bus shelters,buses,grabge cans) collecting valuable ad $$$ … and my neighbour down the street cannot put a billboard on his roof to help him pay his big property tax bill. Im just sayen…. if your concerned with public space then you should also complain about the biggest billboard company “the city of toronto”
December 11th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
landlord: Rami and I wage(d) quite a battle against advertising “on [every] street corner (bus shelters, buses, [garbage] cans).” I encourage you to look through the “Street Furniture” and TTC sections of this site. We have both been highly critical of the City of Toronto in this regard, arguably moreso than of any other individual or entity.
December 11th, 2008 at 12:34 pm
my question extactly…. should the governement be allowed to right a law which is put in place to protect its citizens but excludes itself so that it can reep the benfits????? that like saying … dont buy drugs from that guy on the street buy it from us , we are the governement… that sounds like Amsterdam, Like as in the Netherlands.(red light distrit for those of us that did nt get it)
December 11th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
Shameful that we are not being protected by the bylaws. What is the problem? It seems clear that CBS submitted false info. Why aren’t the bylaws being enforced? I really don’t get it. What is the answer?
Do we call our city councillors?
Does anyone at the city care what we think?
December 15th, 2008 at 5:22 pm
The truth of the matter is that these two self proclaimed public space heros (Jonathan and Rami) both just so happen to drive the exact same model of car. Jonathan drives a light blue Mini and Rami drives a red mini. I wonder how two jobless guys are able to afford these rather expensive cars and why buy the exact same cars (it may be they have a rather close relationship is my guess) or they both received the same amount of money up front for their services. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that these two guys are being paid to do what they do by someone who wants to reduce the amount of available advertising space in Toronto so that their company will be more profitable. Think of who really benefits from these two boys. The city of Toronto and Astral media will benefit the most because if these two boys were to have their way the available signs would be reduced by as much 1/3 resulting in the ad dollars having nowhere else to go other than the street furniture because that’s all thats left of any abundance for the advertiser. Notice they rarely mention Astral media anymore. It is well known in the industry that Astral media has been making tri-vision modifications to a lot of their signs and other modifications that would put their signs outside the scope of the permit they were issued and therefore making them illegal in these two little boys eyes. Think about it…Who really has the time to pursue things like this unless they’re getting paid for it? These guys are both getting paid off and it will eventually come out. Everyone should keep in mind that these two boys are on the take and they think they’re fooling everybody. NEWS FLASH …….You’re only fooling yourselves and lying to a lot of people who actually believe your doing this out of you fight to win back the public space….
Looks like Bullshit.
Smells like Bullshit.
You know the rest…
December 15th, 2008 at 5:45 pm
Wow, Jonathan drives a (light blue) Mini? I need no further proof of his utter corruptness. Damn you Jonathan! That’s right, the comment has convinced me.
And really really lame of you both, from your *equal* payoff, to buy the *same car*. Jeez, no creativity. None. Zero. Ziltch. Why no Audi?
Oh wait, Jonathan *doesn’t* have a light blue Mini. And Rami has had his long before this site ever saw a domain name. So much for the central proof.
Watching your every move –> are you ‘in the industry’?
“It is well known in the industry that Astral media has been making tri-vision modifications…”
I’m not in the industry and didn’t know that tidbit. Regardless, if you’re annoyed with Astral’s illegal work try following Rami’s lead and complain to the city. Maybe even consider volunteering for illegalsigns…
December 15th, 2008 at 10:30 pm
That is seriously the funniest comment I have ever seen written about me on any blog. And I’ve seen a lot.
December 15th, 2008 at 11:56 pm
Yikes! It’s a good thing they didn’t notice my pink Mini!! That would really blow the lid off our scam.
Hey Jonathan and Rami, what should we do after we get a strong billboard bylaw? I was thinking we could get a job with the Tar Sands people, and start a public movement against alternative fuels? The Canada Public Bitumen Committee (CPBC). We could get even richer than we already are, and we could all buy the exact same SUVs! Can I get light blue this time?
A deal’s a deal Mez. You get pink, but you also got the stock options from Astral. -Rami
December 16th, 2008 at 12:03 am
Watching your every move hasn’t spent much time watching Rami & Jonathan’s moves. I appreciate a good conspiracy theory, but the mental image of some ad exec thug-for-hire handing over the Mini keys in a darkened Green P lot… it’s just too much.
December 16th, 2008 at 2:07 am
*grins*
What colour is my Mini? (Wait, Jonathan, when did you get a car??) Dudes, if you had ever met any of us you’d know that there’s no way the industry would have us. We’re thoroughly disreputable.
December 16th, 2008 at 2:09 am
Oh, and
>Who really has the time to pursue things like this unless they’re getting paid for it?
Obsessives, fetishists and people with no life. Yes, Virginia, there really are people who do things for non-commercial purposes. Merry Xmas.
December 17th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
The Toronto East York MLS office has two different phone systems that cannot communicate with each other. They are about to be replaced so the long suffering receptionist can actually transfer you to the person you are calling. Its been like this for years. Says a lot doesn’t it?
Looks like bullshit. Smells like bullshit. You know the rest. -Rami
March 6th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
here i am bored at work and surfing Toronto websites and I come across this?? seriously.. do you work for a living?? LOL i wish i had all the time and money in the world to drive around in a car and take pictures of signs.. then go to archives buildings.. and get information from the city.. wow dude.. go out and get a real job and just cause u cant sleep at night cause you see an ad on the street .. lol i bet you stand in your mirror in a big red cape with the words “illegal sign crusader’!!! here to save the world!!! and dance to the superman theme…go spend your efforts feeding starving children or reducing government spending or supporting our troops or paying your taxes etc etc… lol get a life my god does anyone other then your mom and your friends on here reallllly care about a stupid sign????? lol
August 18th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
I live in the neighbourhood and have been watching Jonathan & Rami because, like them, the signs at the bottom of Burnside are constant eye sores for me though I have (shamefully) not been pro-active on this issue.
I thank Jonathan & Rami here, officially for their altruism. Yes, indeed there are people who, in their idealism, choose to do something because it is the right thing to do regardless of the financial payoff because the real payoff is a far reaching, long term one that has to do with cultural choices, thinking things through and questioning, a way of life that sadly so few Torontonians seem to appreciate, absorbed as they are with immediate monetary gain.
I dream of a city where I am no longer constantly bombarded by ever new fabricated needs, the incescent drive to consume and the accompanying need to earn more, more… and still more. Perhaps if we all lived with only that which we really need, more of us would find the time and energy to seek new truths, to pursue long term goals with the aim to better our lives and our children’s future.
We are “designing” our culture each and every day. To choose the path of least resistance is to shape our future in this direction: the path of unquestioning, sheepish, semi consciousness, the path of immediate gratification disguised as life “accomplishments”, yet in truth having succeededin nothing more than play into the hands of those who would have us so busy earning money and so driven to spend it that we would have no time or energy left to see, to judge or to object.
I despair of the ability of my fellow citizens to really see the state of our city now: A large city with inadequate, inefficient and substandard infrastructure, with garbage blowing in the wind everywhere, even without a garbage strike in effect, and yes, with indiscriminate signage springing up everywhere as far as the eye can see, apparently without any concern for esthetics or consequences.
Doesn’t anyone travel? It doesn’t take much observation to realize that unless we consciously decide to act and change our priorities, Toronto is marching rapidly in the path of the slumiest of US cities. That is what happens when society accepts unquestioningly the false premise that everything must have an immediate financial payoff or it’s not worth our time. Is that what we want?