Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdjustment - 1998-10-27 SIGCOA\1998-10-27-SIGN COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE CITY OF KITCHENER MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD OCTOBER 27, 1998 MEMBERS PRESENT: Ms. S. Campbell and Messrs. W. Dahms and P. Kruse. OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ms. J. Given, Senior Planner and Ms. D. H. Gilchrist, Secretary-Treasurer. Mr. W. Dahms, Chair, called the meeting to order at 9:30 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 recommendation will be forwarded to City Council on Monday November 2, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. and the may appear at the meeting if they wish. APPLICATIONS Submission No. S 10/98- C.R.A.F.T. Group Inc., 402-462 Wellington Street, Toronto, Ontario Re: Lots 8-10 & Block 11, Plan 1745 and Block 4 & Lot A, Registered Plan 1744, 135 Gateway Drive, Kitchener, Ontario. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Mr. B. Webber & Ms. D. Macut Sunset Neon 4210 Morris Drive Burlington, Ontario CONTRA: Mr. B. McColl 22 Edgehill Drive Kitchener, Ontario WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: Mr. V. Martin Pinegrove Community Association c/o Unit C, 120 Turnbull Court Cambridge, Ontario The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to erect a pylon sign having a height of 10.67 m (35 ft.) rather than the permitted 7.5 m (24.61 ft.), an area of 35 m2 (376.75 sq. ft.) rather than the permitted 20 m2 (215.29 sq. ft.) and permission for flashing lights around the perimeter of the sign which is prohibited by the Sign By-law. 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 pylon sign having a height of 10.67 m (35 ft.) rather than the permitted 7.5 m (24.61 ft.), an area of 35m2 (376.75 sq. ft.) rather than the permitted 20 m2 (215.29 sq. ft.), and permission for flashing lights around the perimeter of the sign, which is prohibited by the sign by-law. C0}~]MITTEE OF ADJUST1MENT 27 OCTOBER 27. 1998 The intent of the regulations for maximum sign height and area is to limit signs to a reasonable size allowing for business identification and promotion, while not creating an adverse visual impact. Similarly, flashing signs are prohibited for aesthetic reasons. 1. Submission No. S 10/98 - C.R.A.F.T. Group Inc., cont'd The applicant cites "a combination of setback, traffic patterns, site lines and information required to be displayed" for the Famous Players Theatre (which houses 12 theatres) as reasons for the submission. The applicant has clarified that in order for the information displayed to be visible from passing motorists from a greater distance, the sign has been designed with 25.4 cm (10 inch) high letters for each of the 12 theatres. The portion of the sign listing movie titles has a height of 5.44 m and an area of 23.22 m2. The undesirable impact of the marquee style lights around the perimeter of the sign would be compounded by the number of lights, given the sign area. A permit is required from the Ministry of Transportation for any sign within 400 m and visible from Highway 8, and staff from that agency have confirmed that no such sign may have flashing lights, from the Ministry's standpoint. As such, staff cannot support the requested variance for the flashing marquee lights on the subject sign. With respect to the sign height and sign area, although the increases seem substantial, the proposed sign will be located at the bottom of a slope at the corner of the site, at a level approximately 1.5 m (5 ft.) below the level on which the theatre building and parking area are located. As such, an increase in the height of the sign may be necessary to maximize visibility and readability. The grade differential will also serve to reduce the visual impact of the increased sign height, as the lower 1.5 metres of the sign will back onto the landscaped slope. Further, the increased sign area associated with the sign is largely a result of the increased sign height. There is no restriction on sign width in the Sign By-law, and the width of this sign is not excessive. Further, the sign is set back approximately 10 metres from its main street of exposure, King Street East, due to landscaping and road widening, and as such, would not present an adverse impact from the motorists' perspective. It is noted that the Famous Players site was the subject of a previous minor variance application (S 7/98) for a temporary pylon sign exceeding the maximum sign area, and approval was recommended for that application in part because the sign was temporary in nature. At that time it was acknowledged that this property has a large site area and may merit some relief from the Sign By-law, and staff maintain this viewpoint in relation to the proposed permanent pylon sign. Based on the above comments, it is the opinion of staff that the requested variances for sign height and sign area are minor in nature and meet the general intent of the Sign By-law. The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends approval of the variances for sign height and sign area as shown on the drawings submitted with the application, and recommends refusal of the variance for flashing lights on the proposed sign. The Committee considered the written submission of Mr. V. Martin, on behalf of the Pinegrove Community Association, in opposition to this application. The Committee noted the comments of the Transportation Division, 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 with the proposed sign location. The Committee noted the comments of the Director of Building in which he advised that he has no concerns with this application. The Committee considered the comments of the Ministry of Transportation in which they advised that they will require the applicant to obtain a sign permit from the Ministry if the sign is visible from Highway 8. The Ministry does not allow flashing lights on signs that are visible from a provincial highway. Mr. Webber advised the Committee that he had not seen the neighbourhood association written submission prior to this meeting. He stated that Famous Players is a national retailer with physical COHHITTEE OF ADJUST1MENT 28 OCTOBER 27. 1998 characteristics to maintain from location to location. He pointed out that the lights are not flashing but tracking. Ms. Macut then showed a short video of a location in Mississauga 1. Submission No. S 10/98 - C.R.A.F.T. Group Inc., cont'd with a similar sign. Ms. S. Campbell then questioned whether the sign could be seen from Highway 8 and Mr. Webber stated that he did believe it could be seen from the Highway. They have not applied for a permit from the Ministry but will arrange for a Ministry staff person to attend at the site. Mr. Kruse questioned Mr. McColl as to the proximity of the closest residence to this site. Mr. McColl responded that there was one house 60 ft. away, one house 80 ft. away and several houses 100 ft. away. Mr. McColl then addressed the Committee advising that there are 600 people in the Pinegrove Neighbourhood Association, which is a preexisting neighbourhood, and it was his opinion that the neighbourhood had been overlooked. He stated that the tree saving plans for this property had been violated and the lighting issue was unacceptable. Referring to the current application, Mr. McColl stated that for the applicant to obtain permission for flashing lights would require a change to the by-law and not a minor variance because they are totally prohibited. The Pinegrove Neighbourhood Association is in complete disagreement with the sign for safety reasons and cited various instances which would create traffic safety problems. Mr. McColl pointed out that the sign is twice the size and height permitted by the by-law and the flashing lights are just not permitted. It was his opinion that if the Committee approved this sign then it must do the same for all the other big box stores in the area. He felt that this was not a minor variance but a complete re-writing of the by-law. When questioned by the Committee, Ms. J. Given, Senior Planner, advised that staff had nothing further to add. When questioned by the Committee, Ms. Given confirmed that, flashing lights are not permitted in the Sign By-law. She advised that staffs position is that flashing lights are not appropriate. With respect to the traffic safety issues raised by Mr. McColl, Mr. Webber stated that City traffic staff have put forward a recommendation for traffic lights at that intersection. Concerning the lights from the sign being visible to the residences on the other side of King Street, Mr. Webber advised that the light is cast 14 ft., although it is visible at a greater distance. Mr. Webber then provided some statistics on traffic accidents vis-a-vis lit signs. Ms. S. Campbell then referred to the staff comments concerning the slope on the site and its effect on blocking a portion of the pylon of this sign. Mr. P. Kruse put forward a recommendation to refuse the application. He noted that the whole development has had a severe impact on the residential neighbourhood across Old King Street. He noted that the rest of the big box stores have complied with the by-law. He stated that the owner built this development knowing what the by-law was. Moved by Mr. P. Kruse Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of C.R.A.F.T. Group Inc. requesting permission to erect a pylon sign having a height of 10.67 m (35 ft.) rather than the permitted 7.5 m (24.61 ft.) an area of 35 m2 (376.75 sq. ft.) rather than the permitted 20 m2 (215.29 sq. ft.) and permission for flashing lights around the perimeter of the sign which is prohibited by the sign by-law on Lots 8-10 & Block 11, Plan 1745 and Block 4 & Lot A, Registered Plan 1744, 135 Gateway Park Drive, Kitchener Ontario BE REFUSED. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance approved in this application is not minor in nature. 2. This application is not desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code Chapter 680 (Signs) would not be maintained on the subject property. C0}~]MITTEE OF ADJUST1MENT 29 OCTOBER 27. 1998 Carried 2. Submission No. S 11/98 - Ontario Hydro, 300-7676 Woodbine Avenue, Markham, Ontario Re: Part Lot 10, Registered Plan 961 & Part Lot 4, Registered Plan 962, Fairway Road South, Kitchener, Ontario. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Mr. M. Klein & Ms. S. Majic c/o Pattison Outdoor 4-505 Kenora Avenue Hamilton, Ontario CONTRA: NONE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to add 2 more sign faces to the existing billboard signs, for a total of 4 sign faces rather than the permitted 2 sign faces. The Committee considered the comments of the Department of Business and Planning Services in which they advised that the applicant is requesting permission to add two more sign faces to an existing billboard sign structure, for a total of four sign faces rather than the permitted two sign faces per billboard structure. In addition, staff note that the Park zoning of the property does not permit a billboard. A previous minor variance approval, S 4/94, legalized the existing billboard with two sign faces, in a Park Zone. This minor variance application would have to be amended to request permission to add two sign faces to a billboard structure in a Park zone. The intent of the regulation limiting the number of sign faces on a property is to control the impact of billboard signs on a site. The intent of the regulation prohibiting billboards in park zones is to avoid billboard signs cluttering park lands with commercial advertising and impairing the park ambience. In this case, the decision was previously made to allow the two sign faces, side by side in this location because, although it is zoned P-l, it does not function as a park and is surrounded by hydro towers and buildings. The back side of the billboards already have a visual impact on the streetscape and the addition of advertising on this face is not expected to have a detrimental impact. Accordingly, the application is deemed to be minor and the impact on the neighbourhood is minimal. The intent of the by-law continues to be met as the location of the sign is not in a typical park setting and no additional infrastructure is proposed. The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends approval of the application, as amended to allow two more sign faces on a sign in a Park Zone. The Committee noted the comments of the Transportation Division, 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 sign location. The Committee noted the comments of the Director of Building in which he advised that he has no concerns with this application. The Committee noted the comments of the Ministry of Transportation in which they advised that a Ministry permit will not be required, as the sign will be located outside the Ministry's area of control for signs. Mr. Klein advised that he agreed with the staff comments and he felt the proposal would make the sign more aesthetically pleasing. C0}~]MITTEE OF ADJUST1MENT 30 OCTOBER 27. 1998 Submission No. S 11/98 - Ontario Hydro, cont'd Moved by Mr. P. Kruse Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of Ontario Hydro requesting permission to add 2 more sign faces to the existing billboard signs, for a total of 4 sign faces rather than the permitted 2 sign faces for a billboard structure located in a Park Zone, on Part Lot 10, Registered Plan 961 & Part Lot 4, Registered Plan 962, Fairway Road South, Kitchener, Ontario BE APPROVED. 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. 3. 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 10:15 a.m. Dated at the City of Kitchener this 27th day of October 1998. D. H. Gilchrist Secretary-Treasurer Committee of Adjustment