Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdjustment - 1998-12-08 SIGCOA\1998-12-08-SIGN COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE CITY OF KITCHENER MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD DECEMBER 8, 1998 MEMBERS PRESENT: Ms. S. Campbell and Messrs. W. Dahms, A. Galloway, P. Kruse and S. Kay. OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ms. J. Given, Senior Planner and Ms. D. H. Gilchrist, Secretary-Treasurer. Mr. W. Dahms, Chair, called the meeting to order at 10:05 a.m. This meeting of the Committee of Adjustment as a Standing Committee of City Council was called to consider applications regarding variances to Chapter 680 of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code. The Committee will not make a decision on this application but rather will make a recommendation which will be forwarded to Committee of the Whole and Council for final decision. The Chairman explained that this Committee's decision with respect to sign variances is a recommendation to City Council and not a final decision. He advised that the Committee's recommendations will be forwarded to City Council on Monday December 14, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. and they may appear at the meeting if they wish. APPLICATIONS Submission No. S 12/98 -Tall Pines Centre Inc., 10 Pioneer Drive, Kitchener, Ontario Re: Parts 1-14, Reference Plan 58R-10809, 10 Pioneer Drive, Kitchener, Ontario. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Dr. Martin Shelley 587 Mill Park Drive Kitchener, Ontario Mr. R. Coulter Grand River Signs 7 Folkstone Crescent Kitchener, Ontario CONTRA: NONE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to erect a ground sign having a height of 4.88 m (16 ft.) rather than the permitted 1.5 m (5 ft.). The Committee considered the comments of the Department of Business and Planning Services in which they advised that the applicant is requesting permission to erect a ground sign with a height of 4.88 metres (16 ft) rather than the permitted 1.5 metres (4.92 ft). The submitted site plan indicates two possible locations for the sign: 'a' and 'b'. Staff have confirmed that the applicant's first choice is location 'b'. Consequently, staff comments are for location 'b' only. It is noted that the agenda notes a variance for a setback of 1.07 metres from the lot line along Pioneer Drive, which is in regard to location 'a', which is not the preferred location. As such, the request for a 1.07 metre setback would not be required. Location 'b' is set back 3 metres from the lot line, which complies with the CO}~]MITTEE OF ADJUST1MENT 32 DECE~{BER 8. 1998 minimum setback required in the sign by-law. 1. Submission No. S 12/98 - Tall Pines Centre Inc., cont'd After reviewing the application, staff note that an additional variance would be required. The application would have to be amended to request permission for the sign to have an area of approximately 9.6 sq.m. (103.34 sq.ft) rather than the permitted maximum of 4 sq.m. (43.06 sq.ft) in an institutional zone. The intent of the sign by-law in limiting the size and area of ground signs is to ensure that the signs are not a visibility concern or distraction to passing vehicular traffic. In addition, regulations for signs in residential, institutional and park zones are more restrictive than regulations for ground signs in commercial/industrial zones. Large signs in institutional/ residential/park zones would be considered aesthetically overwhelming and therefore, not appropriate for these zones. The subject sign is three times the maximum height permitted and more the twice the maximum area permitted for a ground sign in an institutional zone. Staff are of the opinion that these variances are excessive and could not be considered minor in nature as the impact could be substantial. Staff note that abutting properties to the north, west, and east are zoned residential. The abutting property to the south is gas bar/convenience store (zoned commercial). Staff are of the opinion that such a large sign would not be appropriate development for the area, as it may affect the enjoyment of the abutting residential properties and intrude into the residential neighbourhood. After reviewing the site plan on file for the property, staff have noted that an easement in favour of the City extends across the property along Pioneer Drive. The easement is for a sanitary sewer and staff of the Public Works Department have confirmed that the easement must be kept "free and clear of any trees, buildings, structures or obstructions". Consequently, a ground sign is not permitted in any portion of the easement. As a result, a sign permit could not be issued by this department. Based on the above comments, it is staff's opinion that the variance is not minor in nature, nor does it maintain the intent of the sign by-law. The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends refusal of Submission S 12/98. The Committee considered the comments of the Transportation Division, Engineering Department, Region of Waterloo in which they advised that they have no concerns with this application. The Committee noted the comments of the Traffic & Parking Division in which they advised that they have no concerns regarding the proposed sign location. The Committee noted a letter from the Assistant City Solicitor to Dr. Martin Shelley advising that his request to encroach upon the City easements located between the building and Pioneer Drive, for the purpose of installing and maintaining a sign, has been reviewed by the appropriate staff. They advised that they would support a recommendation to Council that the encroachment be permitted, subject to obtaining a variance from the sign by-law and entering into the City's standard encroachment agreement. The letter suggests that Dr. Shelley continue to pursue his application for a variance and once approval is obtained, a recommendation respecting the encroachment will be prepared for consideration by Council. Dr. Shelley addressed the Committee giving a brief history to the application. He noted three problems, which he has addressed: the setback problem, noting that he has chosen location (b) on the plan; the encroachment problem, noting the letter from the Assistant City Solicitor and advised that the sign is wooden and can be removed upon request; and the size issue. With respect to the size of the sign, Dr. Shelley stated that, although the property is zoned institutional, the building will have 10-12 tenants when fully occupied and he always considered the property a plaza complex. Dr. Shelley then submitted photographs of adjacent residential properties occupied by apartment buildings and other higher density residential development and the abutting commercial property, each with large signs. He also showed a photograph of the high fence on the adjacent commercial property, which would block the view of any smaller sign on this property. COHHITTEE OF ADJUST1MENT 33 DECE~{BER 8. 1998 1. Submission No. S 12/98 - Tall Pines Centre Inc., cont'd When questioned by the Committee, Mr. Coulter, the sign contractor, noted that the sign has been constructed but not erected. Dr. Shelley clarified that a portion of the proposed sign has been attached to the existing ground sign on the property. The existing sign advertised the former daycare on the site and is also larger than the by-law permits. The Chairman noted the additional variance for the area of the sign and ask whether Dr. Shelley wished to amend the application and Dr. Shelley made that request. Dr. Shelley stated that he did not think the sign would offend anybody. He also didn't think the sign would cause traffic or visibility problems. A brief discussion then took place concerning reducing the height of the sign and the difference between a ground sign and a pylon sign. Mr. A. Galloway stated that he had no concerns about this sign in this area. He felt it would not be an infringement on the residential area. Ms. S. Campbell noted that she would have no concerns about recommending this sign to City Council. Moved by Ms. S. Campbell Seconded by Mr. A. Galloway That the application of Tall Pines Centre Inc. requesting permission to erect a ground sign having a height of 4.88 m (16 ft.) rather than the permitted 1.5 m (4.92 ft.) and an area of approximately 9.6 m2 (103.34 sq. ft.) rather than the permitted 4 m2 (43.06 sq. ft.) on Parts 1 - 14, Reference Plan 58R-10809, 10 Pioneer Drive, Kitchener, Ontario BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: That the proposed sign shall be placed in location (b) as shown on the plan submitted with the application. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance approved in this application is minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code Chapter 680 (Signs) is being maintained on the subject property. Carried Submission No. S 13/98 - Mak Tung Enterprises Inc., 5070 Dixie Road, Mississauqa Ontario Re: Part Lot 14, Plan 364, 301-319 King Street East, Kitchener, Ontario. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Mr. P. Stanley 301 King Street East Suite 206 Kitchener, Ontario Mr. D. Alexander 301 King Street East Kitchener, Ontario CONTRA: NONE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to erect a ground sign having a height of 2.14 m (7 ft.) on the Charles Street frontage of the property. Ground signs are not permitted in the CO}~]MITTEE OF ADJUST1MENT 34 DECE~{BER 8. 1998 downtown. 2. Submission No. S 13/98 - Mak Tunq Enterprises Inc., cont'd The Committee considered the comments of the Department of Business and Planning Services in which they advised the applicant is requesting permission to erect a ground sign on a property in a D-2 zone. The sign by-law does not permit ground signs in downtown zones. The proposed sign measures 2.4 metres by 1.2 metres (8 x 4 ft), with an area of 2.97 sq.m. (32 sq.ft). The height of the sign will be 2.13 metres (7 ft). Additionally, the attached drawing indicates that the sign will be set back 1.82 metres (6 ft) from the lot line. After reviewing the application, staff consulted with the agent for the variance and he has stated that the line indicated on the submitted plan is actually the sidewalk which was thought to be the lot line. Although there is no survey available for the property, Public Works records indicate that the sidewalk is approximately 1.5 metres (5 ft) from the property line along Charles Street. Therefore, the sign will actually be set back approximately 0.30 metres (1 ft) from the lot line abutting Charles Street. The applicant wishes to erect the free-standing ground sign in a grassed area of the parking lot to provide adequate signage for three tenants in the plaza. The main tenant noted on the sign will be Onward Computers and the other two tenants have yet to be determined. Vehicles access the parking lot by Charles Street and the proposed sign location offers the best visibility to passing traffic along Charles Street. Permissable forms of signage in downtown zones are canopy, fascia, projecting, roof and sidewalk signs. Generally, ground and pylon signs are incompatible with the zero to 4.5 metres building setback typical for buildings in a D-2 zone. However, the building on the subject property fronts onto King Street and is set back a considerable distance from the Charles Street lot line. Consequently, a canopy, fascia, projecting or roof sign would not provide sufficient visibility for a sign to be seen from Charles Street, as they are signs that are located on a building. The submitted sign drawing indicates a clearance of 0.91 metres (3 ft) from the ground to the lower edge of the sign. Staff of the Traffic Division have advised that this would not provide sufficient visibility for vehicles exiting onto Charles Street. It is recommended that the sign have a clearance of at least 1.5 metres (5 ft) from the ground so that there are no visibility concerns. This will bring the total sign height to 2.7 metres (9 ft). Staff are of the opinion that the sign's height and area would not be considered excessive considering the 32 metres (105 ft) frontage along Charles Street. The sign would be considered appropriate development for the property. Based on the above comments, and provided the clearance of the sign is changed to the recommended 1.5 metres (5 ft), it is the opinion of staff that the variance is minor in nature and the general intent of the sign by-law is being met. It is noted that there is no survey available for the subject property and it is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the sign is property situated according to the lot lines. Additionally, a sign permit would be required. The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends approval of the variance applying only to the sign as generally shown on the drawings submitted by the applicant, and amended to provide a clearance of 1.5 metres (5 ft) from the ground. The Committee noted the comments of the Traffic & Parking Division in which they advised that they have reviewed this application and feel the proposed height of the sign is inadequate. In order to provide adequate sight lines under the sign for drivers exiting the abutting driveway, it was recommended that the sign should be a minimum of 1.524 m from the ground. 2. Submission No. S 13/98 - Mak Tunq Enterprises Inc., cont'd The Committee noted the comments of the Transportation Division, Engineering Department, Region of COk~ITTEE OF ADJUST1MEbIT 35 DECEMBER 8. 1998 Waterloo, in which they advised that the Sign Variance Application for a proposed sign to be located on Charles Street between Cedar Street and Eby Street has been reviewed and no further road allowance widening would be required from this property on Charles. When questioned by the Committee, Mr. Stanley advised that he agreed with the recommendation of the Department of Business and Planning Services with respect to the clearance under the sign and it was noted that the Traffic & Parking Division has asked for a 1.524 m clearance, which was agreed to by both the applicant and the Committee. Moved by Mr. S. Kay Seconded by Mr. A. Galloway That the application of Mak Tung Enterprises Inc. requesting permission to erect a ground sign having a height of 2.7 m (9 ft.) on the Charles Street frontage of the property on Part Lot 14, Plan 364, 301-319 King Street East, Kitchener, Ontario BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That there shall be a clearance between the bottom of the sign and grade of 1.524 m. That the variance as approved in this application shall apply to the sign generally as shown on the plans attached to the application. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance approved in this application is minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code Chapter 680 (Signs) is being maintained on the subject property. Carried ADJOURNED On Motion, the meeting adjourned at 10:30 a.m. Dated at the City of Kitchener this 8th day of December 1998. D. H. Gilchrist Secretary-Treasurer Committee of Adjustment