Law Times

LAW TIMES / JUNE 30 - JULY 7, 2008 Amalgamated sign bylaw being developed BY HELEN BURNETT Law Times T oronto is in the midst of developing a new harmo- nized bylaw for signs in the amalgamated city that will also address new technologies and environmental issues, and is being watched fairly closely by lawyers in this area of municipal law practice. The amalgamated sign bylaw will replace the bylaws that were in place with the local municipalities, such as Scarborough, East York, North York, and Metro Toronto. The city has been administering the bylaws of the various munici- palities since amalgamation in 1998, and each bylaw currently has differences in approach, con- tent, and terminology, according to an information report on the subject by the deputy city man- ager issued last year. The report says the new bylaw for signs in Toronto will harmonize requirements across the city and "address the range of signs enabled by new technologies, the city's environmental goals, and the promotion of energy efficiency." It will address issues related to sign approval and enforcement pro- cesses and a new fee structure. Two years ago, a steering com- mittee, made up of the council's municipal licensing and standards committee, Toronto building, city planning and transportation services, was created to review progress on sign harmonization and develope a proposal modelled after the zoning bylaw project. The project got off the ground last fall, when an accelerated work plan was developed to cre- ate a new sign bylaw, with public consultation and bylaw consid- eration expected to take place 14 months after the start of the initiative. The city is reportedly going through the RFP stage for outside consultants and posted a position to hire a project coordi- nator for the program. While the bylaw was initially intended to be in place by early in the new year, Chris Williams, a partner at Aird & Berlis LLP sus- pects it will likely be the spring of 2009 before it is enacted. "That new bylaw, while amal- gamating all of the existing bylaws is also stated to address changes in the sign industry and in the tech- nology that's used to present out- door advertising," he says. Since the old bylaw, there have been several changes, with respect to plasma TV screen advertising and laser projection, for example. Williams says the city has in- dicated there will be consultation with stakeholders, leading up to the enactment of the bylaw. "The bylaw, when it comes, would presumably provide for sort of one set of standards across the city and address new changes and allow the city to collect some more revenues," he says. The new bylaw is something those representing sign companies are watching. "It's important to bear in mind that a sign bylaw, while it does in some ways deal with land use regulation and urban aesthet- ics, doesn't go through the Plan- ning Act process, it goes through the Municipal Act, so there's no process for appeals," he says. At the same time, there are cur- rently two applications in the City of Toronto that seek to address several issues within the existing sign bylaws, including Charter issues, as they challenge parts of the bylaws with respect to the city's current regulation of signs under the Municipal Act. Williams acts for sign company Titan Outdoor in a case that will be heard before the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in July. The appli- cation "challenges the city's inter- pretation of its bylaw relating to mural signs," he says. According to the notice of application, the city defines a mural sign as a sign "painted directly on the face of a wall," while Titan's signs are vinyl sheets attached to the wall. While the company has permits for mural signs, the city has issued notices of violation, as it contends that the signs are "fascia signs" and require a different permit, alleges the notice of application. In its application, Titan is chal- lenging the city's authority under the City of Toronto Act to regu- late "a distinction between adver- tising copy displayed using paint and advertising copy displayed us- ing vinyl," and seeks a declaration that any such regulation is ultra vires. It also contends the city's ac- tions "in respect of Titan's mural sign permits result in a substantial impairment of Titan's (and its cli- ent's) right to free expression," under the Charter. Anna Kinastowski, city solicitor for the City of Toronto, says the municipality is defending its ac- tions on the issues that are raised. With respect to the Titan ap- plication, Kinastowski notes the materials have been filed and the city's position is that the vinyl signs at issue are fascia signs and not mural signs, and that the differen- tial treatment of non-illuminated mural signs and fascia signs can be justified under the Charter. A case decided in January in the Ontario Superior Court of Jus- tice entitled Vann Media Inc. v. the Corporation of the Town of Oakville dealt with a lot of the issues that the courts look at in sign matters, says Williams. The decision was ar- gued at the Court of Appeal several weeks ago, he adds. In the Vann Media case at the Superior Court level, the company was challenging a Town of Oakville bylaw which contemplated that billboards could only be put up in certain employment zones, as long as the land is vacant, there are no other signs on the property, signs are a minimum distance from a residential zone, and are a mini- mum distance from a roadway, says the decision. Vann Media submits that the bylaw contra- vened the fundamental freedom of expression, contrary to s. 2(b) of the Charter. The court ulti- mately quashed the bylaw. The court found the munici- pality hadn't provided sufficient evidence to justify the set of cri- teria for third-party signs, says Williams. "The important thing here is that once you establish that it's just accepted that restric- tions on signs and billboards are an infringement on the Charter, then the onus shifts to the mu- nicipality to justify or legitimize why they're doing it." Another application has also been brought by a company called Strategic Media Outdoor, seeking to interpret or quash cer- tain parts of the sign bylaws in Etobicoke, North York, and the former City of Toronto relating to fascia signs — those on the sides of existing buildings. Stan Makuch, a lawyer with Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP, who is representing Strategic Me- dia, says the application raises three issues, including whether the bylaw is contrary to the Charter and denies freedom of expression; whether it's contrary to the Plan- ning Act, in that it hasn't been passed in accordance with the pro- cedural safeguards of the Planning Act; and also whether it's contrary to provisions of the Municipal Act which were in force at the time — namely that the sign bylaws were passed and had to be re-enacted every five years and were not. LT PAGE 11 All the municipal service information for real estate searches under one cover The Ontario Municipal Service Directory: A Comprehensive Guide for Real Estate Professionals, 2008 With Introduction and Historical Linkages by Michael L. Young, LL.B. Redesigned for 2008, this handy resource helps you process your real estate transactions more efficiently, saving you time and energy. Now published annually, this fifth edition of The Ontario Municipal Service Directory gives you up-to-date and easily accessible municipal contact information. It includes: email addresses information and/or solicitors water arrears, outstanding work orders and zoning compliance The Ontario Municipal Service Directory: A Comprehensive Guide for Real Estate Professionals, 2008 — It also includes schedules and contact information for various other searches including: government ministries responsible for land use planning issues, assessments and Landlord and Tenant Board …and more! Order your copy today! www.canadalawbook.ca www.lawtimesnews.com Ontario Municipal Service Directory (LT 1-4x3).indd 1 6/25/08 2:59:21 PM

• Cover