When Projet Montréal was given leadership of the Plateau-Mont-Royal borough in the recent municipal elections, they promised to make changes. One issue they’ve already moved on is visual pollution.
Explainer takes a gander at the Plateau’s billboard ban.
1 There won’t be any new billboards like this going up in the Plateau. A new bylaw that prevents the placement of any new outdoor billboards within the borough went into effect July 21. (All of the roughly 50 existing billboards in the area are grandfathered in and can remain in place.) "We as a party are determined to fight visual pollution," says Alex Norris, the Mile End city councillor for Projet Montréal. "We find there’s too much of it in the city already. This fits into a broader theme within our party. We were the only party at city hall to oppose the new policy allowing taxis to put advertising on their roofs."
The billboards are part of a larger initiative to stamp out visual pollution in the Plateau. As another example, Norris says his party acted quickly to hand out fines when Reebok branding was painted on some sidewalks along Mont-Royal Ave. "They were just painted on without any permission," he says. "We ensured that there would be a fine for each and every instance of this."
So what else needs fixin’? "The Bixi stands – aren’t those ads ugly?" Norris asks. "This is not something that we could fix on our own… The Bixis are popular and we don’t want to diminish access, but we sure don’t appreciate all that ugly advertising at the end of residential streets."
2 You might expect some of the companies that sell outdoor advertising to be unhappy with this new bylaw, but Norris says he hasn’t heard a peep from anyone in the billboard business. "We heard nothing from them… We’ve had immensely positive feedback on this from residents of the Plateau. Those who have learned about it are very happy. Ultimately, this is the kind of measure that we’d like other boroughs to take as well."
Norris also noted that Michel Depatie, director of Plateau merchants association Avenue du Mont-Royal, also supports the initiative. "We’re happy with it and we think officials should take an even wider look at advertising in public spaces," Depatie told The Gazette. "We are running out of public areas and green spaces and we need to be more respectful of the ones we do have."
4 comments
Must be a slow news week ’round the Hour offices these days ’cause this wee puff piece is barely worth mentioning. Still I suppose I understand the desire to reign in such gigantesque visual eyesores but as it doesn’t affect the billboards already in place which are now, more or less, ubiquitous around town, I’m not totally sure why such a big deal is being made of this non-story. Having said that I agree that the Bixi ads are far more prevalent and by extension more annoying. All the same, this Press Release of a story sounds like little more that bureaucratic back-patting/self-aggrandizing – no more, no less.
In the 18th and 19th centuries Montreal merchants used as much of their brick wall space as possible to hawk their merchandise. In the commercial district of my neighbourhood billboards serve to spice up drab single colour walls. Murals with non-peeling paint would look nicer still. Perching billboards on rooftops as found in other parts of the city is a monstrosity. On our main street two are for the same car dealership but only a phone number but no address info is listed. Another is for a clothing company with only the website info provided. I felt absolutely no urge to find out more about these billboard advertisers. Consumers want to be informed. TV commercials and Internet video ads give much better bang for the advertising buck. What is really bad are the election posters that go up everywhere even in residential areas and are very slow to be removed sometimes remaining for 3 months or longer. We need regulations for these election signs more than for billboards. Our politicians cannot resist showing their faces everywhere almost in a kind of hero worship!
Billboards are kind of irksome when they’re street-side. This I totally get – if anything they should consignh all billboards back to the domain of auto-routes and expressways where they’re not nearly so obtrusive. But they could’ve gone further and dispensed with this grandfather clause all together. Still it’s a small (and yes, self-congratulatory) step in the right direction. As for Reebok with their guerilla side-walk advertising, I’m really glad the city nipped this in the bud. After all if Roadsworth, Montreal’s resident street/pavement artist can’t get away with his thoughtful art, Reebok, with their vainglorious attempts at “branding” and self-promotion, can go fuck themselves!
“Visual pollution”? That has to be one of the most obnoxious terms I’ve heard in awhile. Like all things artistic, what one may view as “visual pollution”, another may view as visual stimulation. Who is to decide exactly what is considered “visual pollution”? I’d rather stare at an ad, getting my mojo working, rather than staring at a blank, dirty wall or building, that’s for dang sure. Sell me something, show me someone visually appealing, excite me, entice me. Since when did advertising and images become pollution? Are eyes not made to see? Should you choose not to look, then don’t look. But maybe I’d like to be informed of new products around the city. Maybe I’m buying what they’re selling. It’s not “visual pollution”, it’s keeping citizens up to date and in the loop.
I reckon Projet Montréal can find something a *little* more important to look after than imaginary pollution not even hazardous to our health. How about tackling real pollution problems? Graffiti? Crime? My eyes don’t need any censoring, thankyouverymuch.