The Five Strategic Media Signs That the City Moved to Take Down
In or about September of 2008, the City identified six signs within the former City of Toronto erected without a permit and notified the applicable sign companies that it would proceed to remove them. Five of the six signs are the Applicant’s.
-Ontario Superior Court judgement
Media buyers, be careful when you’re dealing with Daniel Pitoscia and Mitch Armata’s Strategic Media. You may have your advertising campaign rudely interrupted by a City of Toronto crew.
The recent court decision in Strategic Media vs. City of Toronto, was a rejection of an application by Strategic Media to injunct the City from removing five of Strategic’s illegal signs. Strategic’s move was the result of orders that the City gave to Strategic notifying the company and its landlords that it would remove five of its signs, with a contracted crew, and apply the cost of removal to the property owner’s taxes.
While the ruling applies to all of Strategic Media’s signs, the City picked only a handful to start. We have now found which signs the City sought to remove. None of the signs are currently being operated (except 287 Richmond W, which is showing illegal first-party copy), and we believe that Strategic would be foolish to do so. All of the signs are obstructing windows and all the enforcement action was the result of our complaints, not to mention our relentless pestering. Here they are:
340 Adelaide Street/ Peter:
2 Matilda Street/ DVP:
128 Peter Street/ Richmond West:
287 Richmond Street West:
332 Richmond Street West (facing south):
The sixth sign that the City moved to take down is Pattison’s illegal sign on the north face of 102 Peter Street, which we wrote about in Illegal Sign Removal Progression: 102 Peter Street and Billboard Permit Fraud: 102 Peter Street, wherein we noted that an improper, and eventually revoked permit was once obtained for the sign by Danny Starnino’s Skye Media after Skye’s leasing agent, Steve Wolowich, lied on a building permit application.
