On Wednesday, September 25, City staff held a public consultation at City Hall to gauge opinion on relaxing the rules concerning electronic signs.
As its stands, new approvals for the most contentious type of billboard – the kind that uses bright, high-definition LED screens to display static images that change every 10 seconds – are restricted to the Yonge-Dundas area and a stretch of the Gardiner Expressway. In the name of modernization, however, the industry has been pushing for the circa-2009 sign bylaw to be revisited.
I fought billboards with the Toronto Public Space Committee (TPSC) for many years, including the period during which the group advocated for the current regime. So it’s rather discouraging to find key provisions of the bylaw on the verge of being dismantled only four years later.
Here are some highlights from last week’s meeting in the Council Chambers, which was attended by about 30 people evenly split between members of the public and members of the outdoor advertising industry:
“At the time the bylaw was done, electronic signs were just sort of on the cusp of coming around. There were some but not many. So they were a big unknown at the time. So the consultant’s advice was to go ahead cautiously with them and permit them only where they’re currently permitted.”
– Ted Van Vliet, manager of the Sign Bylaw Unit, describes their earlier approach as having been tentative, rather than reflective of a deliberate decision by Council to reject this kind of sign
“The one thing that I can say to summarize this is: what’s consistent about just about every sign type is that people are okay with them except where they live.”
– Van Vliet sums up the findings of a City-commissioned poll [pdf]
Longtime public space activist (and former TPSC member) Alison Gorbould grills Van Vliet about why this discussion is even happening.
Gorbould: In your presentation, it’s all about what possible negative impacts there could be and how we can maybe control that. And I’d just like to hear about the benefits to the city.
Van Vliet: Well, I mean, the main reason we’re doing this study is because we were asked to [by City Council].
Gorbould: I understand.
Van Vliet: Another reason would be to make sure that our bylaw is modern, is up-to-speed … That’s one possible benefit of it. Having signs decided on a site-by-site, application-by-application basis, I think anybody would agree, is not the best approach to public policy … So to have a comprehensive…
Gorbould: But the benefits to the city of having more electronic signs… any?
Van Vliet: Are… In our experience, where there’s been one electronic sign go up, there’s been four traditional signs come down, so… that’s one benefit. To write that into the bylaw may be tricky, but apparently in the US it has been done.
“I have a question about the maps. So it shows the two zones that you’re proposing that the static signs – which shouldn’t really be called ‘static,’ ’cause they change 8000 times a day, but we’ll go along with your terminology for now – the frequently-changing static signs in the purple and light red…”
– TPSC founder and democracy activist Dave Meslin rejects the terms of the debate
“It’s been conclusively proven on many occasions that these signs don’t cause accidents. In fact, some of the reports go on to say that they reduce accidents. They stimulate the mind.”
– Domenic Ianni, national account manager at the Pattison Sign Group (which primarily deals in first-party signs, i.e. business identification), offers some incorrect/unusual assurances
Ianni: Advertising is a fact of life. You can’t watch television without advertising. You won’t have television without advertising. It’s just the way it is. You live in a big city-
Meslin: But you get a-
Ianni: Bright lights.
Meslin: You get a TV show out of that.
Ianni: Right.
Meslin: What do we get out of a billboard?
Ianni: What do you get out of a billboard?
Meslin: It’s just the ads. It’s like TV without the TV. Who would watch TV if the shows weren’t on?
Ianni: Would you know about products? Would you know about services that are out there without that advertising?
Meslin: Probably, I think so.
“And thank God the City of Toronto is not Gotham because we wouldn’t have a Batman projecting in the sky.”
– Ianni closes out his big speech
Ianni, to City staff: “You’re hurting out industry, too. The same industry, in our case, which is supporting the arts [via the billboard tax]-
Gorbould: Begrudgingly.
Ianni: Well, sure!
Gorbould: You fought that one pretty hard.
Ianni: Sure! Absolutely. Any business would have.
“I know it’s anecdotal information, but I’ll share it with you anyhow: the information that we have available to us suggests that the content of signs that are shown in Europe (which we don’t regulate in North America) tends to be, um, quite different from what we’re used to.”
– Mike Brady, manager of the Traffic Safety Unit within Transportation Services, explains that the conclusions of European studies on billboard safety can’t necessarily be applied here because of all the European sexiness
“It’s an impossible job you all have. Because [the industry] guys want more signs, we want less, you’ll never make everyone happy, and I appreciate you taking the time to have all of us harass you for two hours.”
– Meslin thanks City staff at the end of the night
