Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdjustment - 1999-07-20 SIGCOA\1999-07-20-SIGN COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE CITY OF KITCHENER MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD JULY 20, 1999 MEMBERS PRESENT: OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ms. S. Campbell and Messrs. W. Dahms and A. Galloway Ms. J. Given, Principal Planner, Mr. R. Parent, Traffic & Parking Analyst and Ms. J. Billett, Secretary-Treasurer. Mr. W. Dahms, Chair, called the meeting to order at 10:00 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 (Signs) of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code. The Committee will not make a decision on these applications but rather will make a recommendation which will be forwarded to the Committee of the Whole and Council for final decision. The Chair explained that this Committee's decisions with respect to sign variances are recommendations to City Council and not a final decision. He advised that the Committee's recommendations will be forwarded to City Council on Monday, August 30, 1999 at 7:00 p.m. and the applicants may register with the City Clerk to appear at the meeting if desired. APPLICATIONS Submission No.: Applicant: Property Location: Legal Description: S 5/99 Donald Roedding Homer Watson Boulevard Part Lot 6, Registered Plan 1022 and Part Block L, Registered Plan 1246.1 Appearances: In Support: Contra: Other: Mr. M. Klein Pattison Outdoor Advertising 505 Kenora Ave. Unit 4 Hamilton ON L8E 3P2 None Mr. D. Juma 42 Stokes Court Kitchener ON N2N lZ5 Written Submissions: In Support: None Contra: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to add two billboard sign faces to the back of the two existing side-by-side (10 ft. x 20 ft.) single faced billboard signs to create a double sided display. The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in which they advised that the applicant requests permission to add two billboard sign faces to the back COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 12 JULY 20, 1999 1. Submission No.: S 5/99(Cont'd) of two existing side-by-side single-faced billboard signs to create a total of four sign faces rather than the permitted two sign faces on any one lot. The existing billboard with two sign faces was issued a sign permit and constructed in 1995. At that time the sign complied with all regulations of the Sign By-law. Since the issuance of that permit changes have been made to the Sign By-law and consequently the existing billboard is now considered legal non-conforming. The distance separation between billboards in commercial zones has increased and billboard signs are now required to be setback from the side lot line. The existing sign is now legal, non-conforming as a billboard located approximately 107 metres (350 ft) from another billboard on a separate lot rather than the required 300 metres (984 ft) and set back from the side lot line 1.8 metres (6 ft) rather than the required 3 metres (9.8 ft). Approval of any additional sign faces would also require approval of two additional variances to the Sign By-law as set out above. The intent of the regulation limiting the number of sign faces on a property is to control the visual impact of billboard signs on the landscape. Together with the 300 metre separation of billboards, the intent of the by-law is to control the proliferation of billboard signs across the City. Approval of this variance would not maintain Council's intent as set out in the current Sign By-law regulations, particularly as the existing sign location contravenes the current separation requirements. Adding two additional sign faces would add to the proliferation of signs. The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends refusal of Application S 5/99. The Committee noted the comments of the Director of Building in which he advised that the Building Division has no concerns or comments with respect to this application. The Committee noted the comments of the Traffic & Parking Analyst in which he advised that the Traffic & Parking Division has reviewed this application and has no concerns with respect to the proposed sign. The Committee noted the comments of the Engineering Department, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised that they have no concerns; however, any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 91-91, as amended by By-law 93-050, or any successor thereof. By-law 91-91 may require the payment of Regional Development Charges for this development prior to the issuance of a building permit. The Committee noted the comments of the Grand River Conservation Authority in which they advised that they have no objection to the above noted application. The Chair reviewed the comments, noting that the Department of Business and Planning Services are recommending refusal of the application and inquired if the applicant had anything further to add. Mr. M. Klein explained that the current sign consists of 2 side-by-side single faced signs for which permits were issued in 1985. At that time, the Ministry of Transportation regulations did not permit the signs to be double sided. Mr. Klein stated that his client is now asking for permission to double side the two billboards. He advised that the property on which the signs are located is currently vacant and that the signs will only be located on this property until such time as the property is sold. He stated that the intent of the regulations were to limit the visual impact on landscapes and advised that the billboards in question already have visual contact with the street. Accordingly, he stated that, in his view, he did not believe that these billboards would have a visual impact. He further pointed out that the majority of billboard signs within the City are legal non-conforming today and current regulations are in place to control the proliferation of billboard signs across the City. In this regard, he stated that he did not believe this application would have an impact or cause an increase of new structures. The Chair inquired if staff had anything further to add and Ms. Given responded that the current signs do not meet the separation distance of 300 metres nor do they meet the current sideyard requirements of 3 metres. In total, she stated that if approval were given to this COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 13 JULY 20, 1999 Submission No.: S 5/99(Cont'd) application, 3 variances would be required, together which staff believe do not maintain the intent of the Zoning By-law. Mr. A. Galloway requested clarification that the billboard signs, when constructed, were not allowed to be double sided. Ms. J. Given responded that at the time of construction, City regulations would have allowed double sided faces; however, Ministry of Transportation Regulations did not permit double sided faces. She advised that the City's regulations have now changed to allow only one billboard sign double sided or single faced side-by-side billboard signs. Mr. A. Galloway stated that he did not agree that this application would have a negative impact and was prepared to move approval of the application. Moved by Mr. A. Galloway Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of Donald L. Roedding requesting permission to add 2 billboard sign faces to the back of the 2 existing side-by-side (10 ft. x 20 ft.) single faced billboard signs to create a total of 4 sign faces, rather than the permitted 2 sign faces on any one lot, with a separation distance of 107 metres (350 ft.), rather than the required 300 metres (984 ft.), and an easterly sideyard setback of 1.8 metres (6 ft.), rather than the required 3 m (9.8 ft.), on Part Lot 6, Registered Plan 1022 and Part Block L, Registered Plan 1246.1, Homer Watson Boulevard, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variances approved in this application are 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 The Chair pointed out to Mr. Klein that the decision of the Committee is a recommendation to Council which will be considered at the Council meeting of August 30, 1999, at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber and advised that he may register as a delegation to appear before Council at that time. Submission No.: Applicant: Property Location: Legal Description: S 6/99 Blue Spruce Properties Inc. 1595 and 1601 Victoria St. N. Part of Lot 123, German Company Tract, designated as Part 2, Plan 58R-1703 Appearances: In Support: None Contra: Written Submissions: In Support: Contra: None None None COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 14 JULY 20, 1999 Submission No.: S 6/99(Cont'd) As no one was in attendance to support the application, the Committee delayed consideration of the matter until the end of the meeting. Submission No.: Applicant: Property Location: Le.qal Description: S 7/99 Regional Municipality of Waterloo Victoria Street North Road Allowance Adjacent to Lot 6, Plan 712 & Block B, Plan 928 Appearances: In Support: Mr. D. Edissi 596 Frederick St. Kitchener ON N2B 2A9 Contra: None Written Submissions: In Support: None Contra: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to legalize an existing pylon sign partially located on a Regional road allowance; and, to relocate an existing portable sign and place a new portable sign on lands to be leased from the adjacent property owner. The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in which they advised that the owner of the commercial plaza at 907-935 Victoria Street North wishes to obtain approvals for the installation of a third portable sign for the benefit of the plaza tenants. The property is adjacent to the intersection of Frederick Street and Victoria Street North, which was recently realigned and modified by the Region, resulting in an exceptionally wide boulevard adjacent to this property. While the third portable sign can be adequately separated from the other two existing portable signs, the proximity of the paved parking lot to the lot line between the plaza and the Regional right-of-way makes it impractical to locate the sign on the same property as the business for which the sign would be issued, as required by Section 680.15.6 of the Municipal Code. Instead, the owner has explored with Regional staff, the opportunity to locate the sign on the Region's property, under a lease arrangement. Regional staff have concurred with leasing land to the plaza owner, and in documenting the land required to be leased, it was revealed that the existing pylon sign and one portable sign already encroach onto the Region's property. Accordingly, variances to the Municipal Code are required for the existing pylon sign shown as "A" on the plan submitted, the existing portable sign at the easterly end of the property, shown as "B" on the plan, and for a new portable sign, generally shown as "C" on the plan. These signs would be "non-accessory", whereas the Sign By-law permits only billboard signs to be non-accessory, or third party. Further, relief is indirectly required from Section 680.17.6 of the Municipal Code for the pylon sign, which requires a 0.4 metre setback from any lot line; the pylon sign straddles the lot line. Staff have no concerns with supporting the applications as this is a very unique situation where the distance between the property line and the carriageway is excessive, causing difficulty in providing reasonable exposure for signs advertising businesses in the property. Approval of the variances will provide adequate opportunity for signage for businesses on the property in a location which is suitable to the City and the Region. The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends approval of the variance to permit one new non-accessory portable sign and legalize an existing non-accessory pylon sign 0 metres from the lot line and legalize an existing portable sign, all generally in the location shown COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 15 JULY 20, 1999 3. Submission No.: S 7/99(Cont'd) with the plan submitted with the application. The Committee noted the comments of the Director of Building in which he advised that the Building Division has no concerns or comments with respect to this application. The Committee noted the comments of the Traffic & Parking Analyst in which he advised that the Traffic & Parking Division has reviewed this application and has no concerns with the proposed legalization of the existing pylon sign, or the location of the proposed portable sign. The Committee noted the comments of the Engineering Department, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised that they have no objection to the legalization of the existing pylon sign located on the Victoria Street road allowance. Due to the large area of road allowance along the Victoria Street frontage of this property, the Region of Waterloo is prepared to lease a 10 foot (3 m) wide portion of the Victoria Street road allowance to the plaza owner for the purpose of placing two portable signs. In addition, the Region advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 91-91, as amended by By-law 93-050, or any successor thereof. By-law 91-91 may require the payment of Regional Development Charges for this development prior to the issuance of a building permit. The Committee noted the comments of the Grand River Conservation Authority in which they advise that they have no objection to the above noted application. The Chair reviewed the comments and inquired if the applicant had anything further to add and Mr. D. Edissi responded that he had nothing further to add. Mr. A. Galloway stated that he was prepared to move approval of the application. Ms. S. Campbell stated that she was not in favour of supporting the application as, in her opinion, locating 3 signs on one property was excessive. Moved by Mr. A. Galloway Seconded by Mr. W. Dahms That the application of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo requesting permission to erect one new non-accessory portable sign, and legalize an existing non-accessory pylon sign 0 m from the lot line, rather than the required 0.4 m (1.31 ft.), and to legalize an existing portable sign, on the road allowance adjacent to Lot 6, Plan 712 and Block B, Plan 928, 907-935 Victoria Street North, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: That the variances as approved in this application shall be in accordance with the plan as submitted with the application for Submission No. S 7/99. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variances approved in this application are 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 The Chair pointed out to the Mr. Edissi that the decision of the Committee is a recommendation to Council which will be considered at the Council meeting of August 30, 1999, at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber and advised that he may register as a delegation to appear before Council at that time. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 16 JULY 20, 1999 Submission No.: S 7/99(Cont'd) The Committee then recessed the meeting, temporarily, at 10:15 a.m., and re-convened the meeting at 11:50 a.m. Submission No.: Applicant: Property Location: Legal Description: S 6/99 Blue Spruce Properties Inc. 1595 and 1601 Victoria St. N. Part of Lot 123, German Company Tract, designated as Part 2, Plan 58R-1703 Appearances: In Support: Mr. C. Bisson c/o C Signs 18 Holborn Crt., Unit 211 Kitchener ON N2A 4A1 Contra: None Written Submissions: In Support: None Contra: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to locate a pylon sign in front of the building municipally known as 1595 Victoria Street North, with a 0.6 m (1.96 ft.) ground clearance, rather than the required 2.44 m (8 ft.). The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in which they advised that the applicant requests permission to locate a pylon sign with a clearance from the ground of 0.6 metres (2 ft) rather than the required of 2.44 metres (8 ft). The applicant wishes to erect a sign with a readerboard that has easy access for changing the messages on the sign. Staff note that a portable sign presently exists in this location and that the sign is being installed permanently making it more like a ground sign. Staff feel that it would be more appropriate to define the proposed sign as a ground sign rather than a pylon sign. Therefore, it is recommended that this application be amended to request a ground sign with a height of 2.44 metres rather than the maximum 1.5 metres, an area of 4.4 square metres rather than the maximum of 3 square metres and a setback from the front lot line of 1.2 metres rather than the required 3 metres. Staff are of the opinion that the requested sign is more aesthetically appealing than a portable sign and therefore approval of the minor variances would be desirable in the long term. The proposed sign has an area of 4.4 square metres which exceeds the 3 square metres permitted for a ground sign but is less than the 6.7 square metres (72 sq. ft.) maximum permitted for a portable sign. The proposed 2.44 metre height of the sign exceeds the 1.5 metres permitted for a ground sign but is less than the 3.7 metres maximum height permitted for portable signs. Lastly, the proposed 1.2 metre setback from the Victoria Street lot line is less than the required 3 metre required but exceeds the 0.4 metre setback required for portables. The intent of the Sign By-law regulations regarding ground signs is to ensure that there are no visibility concerns and that the sign will not cause a distraction to passing vehicular traffic. Staff of the Traffic Division has no concerns regarding visibility of the proposed sign, therefore meeting the intent of the by-law. It is noted that a sign of this size is not inappropriate considering the size of the property (11,736 square metres) and its frontage (120.7 metres) on a primary arterial road that provides good visibility to a high volume of traffic along Victoria Street. Regarding visibility, it is noted that the COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 17 JULY 20, 1999 4. Submission No.: S 6/99(Cont'd) Region-owned boulevard adjacent to the front lot line provides additional separation from the actual paved portion of roadway. Accordingly, the application is deemed to be minor in nature, maintains the intent of the Sign By- law and would create a more appealing look than the existing portable sign. The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends approval of the minor variance as amended relative to a ground sign and as shown on the submitted drawings. The Committee noted the comments of the Director of Building in which he advised that the Building Division has no concerns or comments with respect to this application. The Committee noted the comments of the Traffic & Parking Analyst in which he advised that the Traffic & Parking Division has reviewed this application and has no concerns with the proposed sign or its' location. The Committee noted the comments of the Grand River Conservation Authority in which they advised that they have no objections to the above noted application. The Committee noted the comments of the Engineering Department, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 91-91 as amended by By-law 93-050, or any successor thereof. By-law 91-91 may require the payment of Regional Development Charges for this development prior to the issuance of a building permit. The Chair reviewed the comments, noting that staff are recommending that the application be amended to request a ground sign with a height of 2.44 m and an area of 4.4 m2 with a setback from the lot line of 1.2 m. Mr. C. Bisson requested clarification of the amendments. In this regard, Ms. J. Given advised that, as the sign is being permanently installed, it is considered to be a ground sign rather than a pylon sign. Accordingly, she advised that the variances being recommended are based on a ground sign rather than a pylon sign. She further pointed out that the sign, as proposed, is more aesthetically appealing than a pylon sign and, therefore, more desirable in the long term. The Chair stated that the intent of staff's recommendations were to clarify the definition of the variance and that the look of the sign would not be adjusted. Accordingly, he inquired of Mr. Bisson if he would agree to amend the application as recommended by staff. Mr. Bisson responded that he would support the amendment with respect to the ground sign but questioned how this would affect the ground clearance. Ms. S. Campbell advised that the sign itself would not change; rather the way in which relief from the Zoning By-law was being requested was being changed. Ms. J. Given further clarified that ground clearance was not an issue with respect to this sign. Moved by Ms. S. Campbell Seconded by Mr. A. Galloway That the application of Blue Spruce Properties Inc. requesting permission to locate a ground sign with a height of 2.44 m. (8 ft.), rather than the required 1.5 m (4.92 ft.), and an area of 4.4 m2 (47.36 sq. ft.), rather than the required 3 m~. (32.29 sq. ft.), and a frontyard setback of 1.2 m (3.93 ft.), rather than the required 3 m (9.84 ft.), on Part Lot 123 German Company Tract, designated as Part 2, Plan 58R-1703, 1595-1601 Victoria Street North, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: That the variances as approved in this application shall be in accordance with the plan as submitted with the application for Submission No. S 6/99. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 18 JULY 20, 1999 4. Submission No.: S 6/99(Cont'd) It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variances approved in this application are 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 The Chair pointed out to Mr. Bisson that the decision of the Committee is a recommendation to Council which will be considered at the Council meeting of August 30, 1999, at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber and advised that he may register as a delegation to appear before Council at that time. ADJOURNMENT On motion, the meeting adjourned at 11:58 a.m. Dated at the City of Kitchener this 20th day of July, 1999. J. Billett Secretary-Treasurer Committee of Adjustment