Illegalsigns.ca - Illegal Outdoor Ads Tracker

[andreapalladio]

Well, considering oneself to have rights over property is not enough to actually give one rights with respect to private property. And properly so. And our society embraces advertising in general - it drives the economy.

 

[andreapalladio]

Except that governments don't, which is why the outdated laws banning these signs aren't enforced. And shouldn't be.

 

[mark simpson]

Sometimes the ads are more pleasant than blank walls.

I prefered the stretch of Bloor between Avenue & Spadina with the advertisement than without (worse still ... the framing used to stretch and secure the ads to the sides of buildings remains in place)

 

[CanadianNational]

Illegal ads are the engine of the economy? City laws need not be enforced? Rebel, rebel, indeed!

The laws are outdated? That's quite a supposition. Here I thought they were more apt and cogent than ever, especially in the face of crass corporate opportunism, access and power.

As for rights over private property, I didn't think we were talking about the Second International here. Just that commercial entities respect local laws regarding the public realm, and stop acting as charmlessly as your local pusher.

 

[andreapalladio]

Well, you'd be the authority on local pushers.

 

[CanadianNational]

Excuse Me?!

My tone in my last post might be emotional, but it is not a personal attack, AP. Stick to articulating your point and quit the ugly bullying.

 

[Archivistower]

ap, I seem to recall a year-ago discussion on bicycle safety in which you were quite adament that I was breaking the law, that there was no need to do so, and that a law was a law was a law. I guess you've changed your tune, or are you a radical libertarian only when it suits your needs?

 

[andreapalladio]

There's a big difference between intentionally operating a vehicle in a manner that puts people's health and safety at risk and posting a sign that harms no one.

 

[spmarshall]

ap, I seem to recall a year-ago discussion on bicycle safety in which you were quite adament that I was breaking the law

I remember that one. Not coming to a complete stop at a 4-Way stop and treating it as a yield sign (of course stopping to give way to pedestrians or motorists who have arrived first), is in my opinion, breaking the letter of the law, but abiding by the spirit of the law. And that does not put "health and safety" at risk. Do you, ap, make a full and complete stop at all times while on a bicycle in a situation like this?

Rarely are motorists stopped for "rolling stops". If I ever got a ticket for this offense while on a bicycle, I would plead guilty with explanation. Our HTA is badly outdated.

Illegal ads, though, are done purposely illegally and do break both the letter and spirit of the law. As does tobacco advertising. Are you in favour of that too?

 

[andreapalladio]

Sure. It's a legal product that both the provincial and federal governments subsidize with our tax dollars.

 

[Archivistower]

Oh, ap, you can so smugly insufferable at the same time as you twist all logic to your own purposes. My driving down a one way street with my bike the wrong way is endangering health and safety (though I've done it right in front of police officers walking, driving bikes or in a car dozens of times without incident) but tobacco advertising is OK, but wait, signs are OK because they are private but blah blah blah. You twist whatever you want around to suit your own volatile mix of prudism and libertariansim.

Whatever. You're like talking to a stone, so I won't bother coming into this thread again.

 

[Bogtrotter]

I would recomend coming into this thread again, your opinion is as valid as anybodys. The law is not definite, if enough people bitch- it will be changed.

 

[spmarshall]

Moscoe seems like he wants to take on Esso. Personally, I don't know why anyone would get gas there, given that its the only gas retailer to subject customers to loud, annoying commericals as they pump. Then again, I've always avoided Esso.

Moscoe sees gusher, gets trickle

Proposal to tax fuel pump ads quickly runs out of gas

Mar 08, 2007 04:30 AM
John Spears
CITY HALL BUREAU

Toronto Councillor Howard Moscoe wants oil companies to pay for the privilege of blaring commercials at customers while they pump gas.

But the pot of gold that Moscoe had hoped to collect from the companies shrank dramatically when city staff checked into his bright idea.

Moscoe discovered that North York's sign bylaw – which draws a very wide definition of what constitutes a "sign" – applies to gas pumps with video terminals that play commercials while the gas flows.

That means they should have to acquire sign permits to operate the pumps, Moscoe argued. His preliminary estimate was that the city could scoop close to $1 million in revenue from permit fees by counting each individual pump as a sign.

But city staff determined that gas stations could be charged only one fee, regardless of the number of pumps.

Furthermore, because Toronto's sign bylaws have never been harmonized, Moscoe's ploy wouldn't work right across the city. Moreover, the licence fee was about half what Moscoe had estimated – a modest $84 per location.

Given that only about 50 gas stations in North York would be subject to the fees, the revenue generated would be a meagre $4,200.

Moscoe still maintains that the pumps should be required to obtain sign permits – and shouldn't be allowed to air commercials until the permits are issued.

Isn't that overkill, he was asked.

"It's a bit gentler than laying charges," he said. "I'm trying to be reasonable."

A report on a city-wide policy for the video signs is to be drafted later this year.

For the legally minded, here's what constitutes a "sign" under North York bylaws:

"Sign means any surface upon which there is printed, projected or attached any announcement, declaration, or insignia used for direction, information, identification, advertisement, business promotion or promotion of products, activity or services, and includes a structure, whether in a fixed location or designed to be portable or capable of being relocated, or part thereof specifically designed for foregoing uses. Furthermore, this includes flags, banners, advertising devices or any object intended for advertising purposes."

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

From the Post:

City moves against illegal billboards

Peter Kuitenbrouwer, National Post Published: Saturday, February 14, 2009

Prominent billboards across Toronto are coming down.

The Ontario Superior Court of Justice yesterday granted the City of Toronto power to take down illegal billboards, despite a Charter of Rights challenge.

"We will go out and take them down and charge them on the tax bill if they don't take them down themselves," Councillor Howard Moscoe (Eglinton-Lawrence), the city's licensing and standards chief, said yesterday.

Strategic Media Outdoor Inc. erects billboards, generally on buildings, all over town, advertising Telus cell-phones, PlayStation, Heineken and many other brands. After complaining for years of the difficulty of following the city's policies on signage, the company apparently gave up obeying the rules.

Justice Alexandra Hoy notes in her court ruling that, "Over the last year or so, the applicant began erecting signs without obtaining permits."

The City of Toronto, pressured by an activist group, ordered the company to comply, but Strategic Media filed an appeal under the Charter of Rights. It sought an injunction to permit its billboard while that appeal winds its way through the court system.

Daniel Pitoscia, director of Strategic Media, had told the court his company would go bankrupt if the signs came down, but the judge was not convinced. The company can simply obtain permits, as it previously did, she said.

Activist Rami Tabello's group, Illegalsigns.ca,has inundated the city with complaints about unlicensed billboards in recent years. "The City of Toronto building department is supposed to be policing the sign laws, but they've been extremely lax," Mr. Tabello said. "We had to do their job for them.

"Nobody inspects these permits until we came along and said, 'What are you doing?' ''

Ann Borooah, the city's chief building official, did not returns calls yesterday.

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/canada/toronto/story.html?id=1288842

AoD

 

[JasonParis]

Thank you Rami Tabello!