By Pepper Parr
September 24, 2015
BURLINGTON, ON
Why are there all these rules and bylaws? Every time you turn around the city is standing there telling you – you can’t do that.
It isn’t always easy to understand the reasons for a bylaw but there is a situation brewing in the city that points up why there are rules.
ADI Development called it hoarding; the ward Councillor didn’t see it that way – its a billboard.
The ADI Development Group decided they wanted to put up a great big honking sign along Lakeshore at the corner of Martha – they told the bylaw people that it was hoarding to keep people off the property. Fine – but the sign was on just two corners of the lot – it was clearly advertising but ADI thought they had found a loophole and they were going to exploit it.
Problem with this kind of thinking is that if ADI development gets away with this – everyone will want to put up bill boards and call them hoardings and point to the ADI example.
Is this hoarding or pieces of plywood waiting to become a billboard? Located at the corner of Brant and Blairholme – great visibility.
There is a lot on the corner of Brant and Blairholme that wants to do just that – the boards are up now – painted black – doing just what isn’t clear. They look like a ground level bill board waiting for an advertising message.
How will city council handle this latest curve ball that ADI Development has thrown?
Dear Nothing,
Not sure where the evidence of proactivity or engagement by Council is before this all hit the fan. This is a massive scale project in Ward 2 that has the potential to dramatically alter and re-define our downtown Burlington. Whether or not one is a Meed Ward fan is irrelevant. This one rests squarely on her shoulders. I would suggest that she re-focus her energy away from the fence drama and engage some savvy professional(s) to help City Hall negotiate a “best of the worst” solution.
Signs, a frames and advertising on hording seem common in Burlington.
I just returned from the RBG along plains rd.
Not as large or colourful as the one’s on Martha however, they are present including ADI advertising for the new Station West development on both sides of the road.
Dear Nothing,
Not sure where the evidence of proactivity or engagement by Council is before this all hit the fan. This is a massive scale project in Ward 2 that has the potential to dramatically alter and re-define our downtown Burlington. Whether or not one is a Meed Ward fan is irrelevant. This one rests squarely on her shoulders. I would suggest that she re-focus her energy away from the fence drama and engage some savvy professional(s) to help City Hall negotiate a “best of the worst” solution.
Enid: – Council did not get to “vote” it down” and it was not because Ward 2 councillor “slept through” the project. It was down to the wire on the 180 day time frame (more to do with planning) ADI new full well that the project would be voted down by council. ADI decided to go straight to the OMB before it even went to council, I know, I was there… one can tell you are not a fan of the councillor so I take your comment for what they are worth. Nothing.
ADI was able to appeal because the 180 days had elapsed before the scheduled Council meeting.
It didn’t matter if ADI knew the project would be voted down by Council, the only legally material factor was that the 180 days elapsed and ADI got a free pass as this city failure alone is grounds for the appeal.
No other reasons or arguments were required of ADI.
James, this is a lame attempt by the Ward 2 councillor to deflect attention away from her incompetence in allowing ADI to take this to the OMB without Council voting it down. How the councillor could “sleep through” a project of this scale in “her own backyard” is inconceivable. All the fuss about hoarding and signage is a ruse to dupe her followers into believing that she is “all over it”.
Exactly Enid. This is her attempt to act tough after she dropped the ball on us. Doesn’t practice what she preaches. I don’t care about signage or whether or not hoarding happens to have printing on it. It’s all Trivia to deflect for sure.
The more the ward councillor fusses over the signs the more ridiculous she looks. Furthermore it’s insulting to her constituents that this makes up for anything. If there is time to book workshops for chats and hugs with developers there ought to be the energy and time to push for a vote meeting within 180 days.
Does anyone know the timeline on this though? Was the ward councillor conveniently off work with her whiplash complications ?
Editor’s note: That is an uncalled for comment. Meed Ward’s injury was serious but had nothing to do with the sign that ADI put up. The job of s council member is to keep on top of things – she isn’t the bylaw enforcement officer. Let us try and be a little more considerate.
I was referring to the timeline of the 180 days.
Personally I have no issue with advertising posted on hoarding fencing, or ground billboards if you will. Go to any big city in North America and you’ll see it. It’s not a big deal. Typical hoarding fencing is ugly, at least this gives us something cleaner to look at. I’m not sure why this is being blown out of proportion and made into an issue.
The ADI project and the Blairholme property represent two very different situations.
ADI is using it’s (dare I say hording) to advertise an imminent project. Exactly what it will turn out to be is now up to the OMB.
Make no mistake they will be building something and are advertising for that purpose. Hording /advertising has been done before and this is the first time I have heard any suggestion it may cause a hording/billboard free for all. Whatever one’s position is on the project demonizing ADI for this is simply not constructive.
The Blairholm property to my knowledge does not have and imminent project or even a proposal in place. Any advertising on their hording would be for a third party that could possible generate revenue, explaining their request for a billboard.
I do wonder if we will see any political signs pasted to the inviting black background ? Just a thought !
Advertising for a project that is happening and advertising for a third part are very different things.
If hording is “to keep people off property” then a hording fence has to “completely” enclose a property with no possible way to access property. Guess the wording of that bylaw should be changed.