Spacing

Text by Philip Evans, edited by Kurt

When we think of what distinguishes cities from one another, we often think of the experience of the streets through the sights and sounds that define the various neighbourhoods. We remember the landmarks that allow us to navigate the city including the unique signs that contribute to the sense of place of each neighbourhood through a myriad of colours, languages, symbols and flags.

Over the years, regulatory frameworks have been introduced to declutter city streets and reduce the cacophony of advertising that was competing for eyeballs. Bylaws are one such tool that municipalities utilize to control the visual landscape of urban streetscapes. In Toronto, for instance, new signs in require a Signage Application which is reviewed by various departments to ensure it meets signage regulations. For Heritage Conservation Districts (HCDs), signage design guidelines may be included to preserve the look and feel of a designated street. These guidelines define the type of signs permitted, the placement of signage on the building façade, and the size and scale of a sign. Signage above the ground floor is usually prohibited in Toronto along with signs that project from the building facade. This results in a one size fits all approach and disregards unique signs that may have historically existed on a building.

In our practice as heritage architects and planners, we’ve encountered numerous examples of signs that had previously been removed but cannot be reinstated because they no longer conform to current signage design guidelines. Historic signs can play an important role in establishing a building’s legacy. The idea for a book about the history of signage in Toronto arose from a conversation about the powerful influence of signage bylaws on cultural heritage landscapes.

It has become clear that instead of general restrictions on signage types and placement, a more qualitative approach can be employed. Through legitimate analysis and research, a case could be made for the historic significance of a sign that does not conform to heritage design guidelines. Other qualitive guidelines could be employed to ensure legibility, minimize light pollution, avoid distraction from adjacent buildings, and include an awareness of the built context that shapes the neighbourhood.

The design and placement of historic signs are tied to each individual site, building function, values and architectural styles. Cities are formed through layers and are not sanitized places, neither perfect or seamless and we need signage design guidelines that reflect that reality. Perhaps, a diverse range of signage could provide relief from a world where everything is uniform and branded.

[Text reviewed by Philip, Emma A to provide further description of type studies.]

When we think of what distinguishes one city from another, we often think of the experience of the streets through the sights and sounds that define the various neighbourhoods. We remember the landmarks that allow us to navigate the city including unique signs that contribute to the sense of place through a myriad of colours, languages, symbols and flags.

Over the years, regulatory frameworks have been introduced to declutter city streets and reduce the cacophony of advertising competing for eyeballs. Bylaws are one such tool that municipalities utilize to control the visual landscape of urban streets. In Toronto for instance, new signs require a Sign Permit which is reviewed by various departments to ensure it meets signage regulations. For protected buildings and neighbourhoods, signage design guidelines may be utilized to preserve a certain look and feel. These guidelines define the type of signs permitted, their placement on the building façade, and the size and scale of a sign. Signage above the ground floor is usually prohibited in Toronto along with signs that project from the building facade. This can result in a one size fits all approach and could overlook unique signs that may have historically existed on a building.

In our practice as architects, conservationists, and planners, we’ve encountered numerous examples of signs that had previously been removed but cannot be reinstated because they no longer conform to today’s guidelines. We’ve also prepared type studies that explore various types of buildings and signs as part of an ongoing obsession we’ve used to educate ourselves on “why” these types emerged and move beyond the fetish of “what”. Through these detailed studies, we hope to articulate a playbook and glossary of terms and definitions that could be deployed not just for existing neighbourhoods and buildings that have cultural value but become part of a larger experience of the city. Through the review of 150+ years of signs documented in this book, it becomes clear that there are many types of signs that define the city of Toronto. Historic signs can play an important role in establishing a building’s legacy and its value should not be overlooked.

Instead of general restrictions on signage types and placement, a more qualitative approach should be employed. Through legitimate analysis and research, a case could be made for the historic significance of a sign that does not conform to current heritage design guidelines. Other qualitive guidelines could be employed to ensure legibility, minimize light pollution, avoid distraction from adjacent buildings, and include an awareness of the built context that shapes the neighbourhood.

The design and placement of historic signs are tied to each individual site, building function, values and architectural styles. Cities are formed through layers and are not sanitized places, neither perfect or seamless and we need signage design guidelines that reflect that reality. Perhaps a diverse range of signage could provide relief from a world where streets are becoming more uniform and blanketed with branding.

When we think of what distinguishes one city from another, we often think of the way we experience the streets through the sights and sounds that define the various neighbourhoods. We remember the landmarks that allow us to navigate the city, including unique signs that contribute to a sense of place through a myriad of colours, languages, symbols and flags.

Over the years, regulatory frameworks have been introduced to de-clutter city streets and reduce the cacophony of advertising competing for eyeballs. By-laws are one such tool that municipalities use to control the visual landscape of urban streets. In Toronto for instance, new signs require a Sign Permit, which is reviewed by various departments to ensure it meets signage regulations. For protected buildings and neighbourhoods, signage design guidelines may be utilized to preserve a certain look and feel. These guidelines define the types of signs permitted, their placement on the building façade, and the size and scale of a sign. Signage above the ground floor is usually prohibited in Toronto, along with signs that project from the building facade. This can result in a one-size-fits-all approach, and could overlook unique signs that may have historically existed on a building.

In our practice as architects, conservationists, and planners, we’ve encountered numerous examples of historical signs that had previously been removed, but cannot be reinstated because they no longer conform to today’s guidelines. We’ve also prepared Type Studies that explore various building and signage types, including for pre-war apartment buildings, mid-century modern commercial office signage, and rural Ontario farmsteads. This is part of an ongoing obsession to move beyond the fetish of what exists today and educate ourselves on why historical types emerged; to contemplate what types might emerge today in response to contemporary social, economic and political factors in our cities outside the influence of regulations. These studies help us recognize the deep diversity of building and signage types that have emerged over the city’s history, in response to the conditions of their day.

Through the review of over 150 years of signage documented in this book, it becomes clear that there are many distinct signage types that define the city of Toronto. They are not uniform, and they offer a range of aesthetic and cultural value. Any type of historical signage may play an important role in establishing a building’s legacy, and its value should not be overlooked. Instead of general restrictions on signage types and placement, a more qualitative approach should be employed. Through legitimate analysis and research, a case could be made for the historical significance of a sign that does not conform to current heritage design guidelines. Other qualitative guidelines could be employed to ensure legibility, minimize light pollution, avoid distraction from adjacent buildings, and include an awareness of the built context that shapes the neighbourhood.

The design and placement of historical signs are tied to each individual site, building function, social values and architectural styles. Cities are formed through layers, and are not sanitized places, neither perfect nor seamless, and we need signage design guidelines that reflect that reality. Perhaps a diverse range of signage could provide relief from a world where streets are becoming more uniform and blanketed with branding.

IN LAYOUT