Thursday, September 10, 2009

A Sign Of The Times.... only in Charlottetown..

Well here we go again... a good corporate citizen, Aliant who have a significant investment in Charlottetown and employ a lot people in Charlottetown wanted to erect a promotional sign on their building on Queen Street.... but the current signage bylaws which are silly at best wouldn't allow for the sign and the bylaws wouldn't allow for a variance... and the reason the bylaws won't allow for a variance is there were so many requests coming before Council that the Councillors decided they didn't want to deal with them anymore... so they redrafted the bylaw to "disallow" variances instead of redrafting the bylaws to allow signs that are in keeping with what businesses are looking for which would have solved the problem with too many variance requests... So Aliant ended up doing what hundreds of other Charlottetown businesses have done and just went ahead and installed the sign without a permit which the City has now asked them to remove... but Alaint have stuck to their guns and won't remove it so now the City is running down to their lawyers to rack up another bill for us taxpayers instead of trying to amend the bylaws to accommodate a well respected business... now the "don't get ahead gang" will be tickled pink to see the City defending their silly bylaws and they'll also be "aghast" at Aliant's stance but I'm hoping some Councillors will have the good sense to try and resolve this situation before it gets out of hand... and just maybe fixing the bylaws to suit business demands may be a good start...

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

just like there should be digital signs allowed.

Andrew said...

Charlottetown Mall wanted to erect a second sign on University Avenue at the old Peter Pan intersection. The city would not allow the sign so the steel frame stayed laying in overgrown grass until the intersection was redeveloped and the frame was removed.

I would have agreed to allowing the mall to have its second sign as the mall needs all the help it can get and the sign would have advertised many stores. Aliant, on the other hand, can take a hike. They overcharge Islanders for piss-poor service and now they want to break our bylaws.

I liked your GNK sign, by the way. It was much more relevant to the community than Aliant's poor attempt at a modern advertisement.

Anonymous said...

the sign actually brightens up the Downtown so what's the big deal?

Jevon said...

Most other places, this works. In Charlottetown, it doesn't. There is nothing wrong with that, Bell is just being a bit ignorant and they city needs stick up for itself a bit in order to set the tone of what will, I have no doubt, be a tumultuous relationship for years to come.

This isn't the GNK painting, which I thought looked great, this is a rather ugly and thoughtless sign that an agency had their 15$/hour Adobe Illustrator jockey whip up and which they then plastered to the highest traffic density zone they could, cheaply.

It's not only Charlottetown where this is being dealt with. Toronto has not amalgamated their signage bylaws since the super city was created and it has led to a lot of confusion ( http://illegalsigns.ca/ ). The city is now in the process of removing illegal signs and drafting a unified by-law that is clear.

Perhaps changing the by-laws is something that should (or shouldn't) be looked at, but in the meantime I would expect the city to fight back a little, much as I expect Aliant to try to take a little. Fair is fair.

Anonymous said...

Even though I agree with you comments it doesn't change the fact "That's one ugly sign"

Anonymous said...

PEI's sign laws are silly.

They are pplied to some but not all and than the towns all have their own laws.

PEI is not that big a place than one sign law would not work here.

I applaud Bell for saying the heck with the sign laws.

If Ch'town wants businesses than they need to grasp the fact that signage is needed. The problem with the Ch'town city council is that the people on it have very little business expereince or none at all.
Most of them are either public servants or retired public servants.
Show me a public servant that knows a damm thing about business or running a business.


Go for ir BELL and others also. Tim I would support you anytime on any attack on these silly sign laws.

Anonymous said...

Bell (Aliant) paid major advertising $$ to be a corporate sponsor for the Vancouver Olympics.

Clifford & Co, want to impose their weenie wills, because they are too lazy to earn their pay.

Tell me again who is wrong here? Good corporate citizen, or Cliffie & Co?

Anonymous said...

I don't get the City, work with business, make things happen. It's difficult enough to run a business (if you think not try running one) why get in the way?

Anonymous said...

I just stumbled upon this by chance, yet I'm amazed that anyone would argue for more signage. Drive down University Avenue, New Minas, or like places. Ugly.
Yet, go to Freeport, the gaslight district of San Diego, much of Britain and Europe and you find tastefulness. In Freeport the McDonalds looks like another historical property. These things have to be regulated or businesses will keep putting up ugly signage like the one in this picture. If you don't believe me, drive down University Avenue and ask yourself if it's appealing.

Anonymous said...

Please stop parking in illegal parking spots, Tim, then you can worry about illegal signage...