HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdjustment - 2000-08-15 SIGCOA\2000-08-15
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT
FOR THE
CITY OF KITCHENER
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD AUGUST 15, 2000
MEMBERS PRESENT: Messrs. S. Kay, P. Kruse and A. Galloway.
OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ms. J. Given, Principal Planner and Ms. J. Billett, Secretary-Treasurer.
Mr. S. Kay, Vice-Chair, called this meeting to order at 10:08 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 28, 2000 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:
Le.qal Description:
SG 2000-006
Mennonite Central Committee (ON)
335 Lancaster Street West
Lot 15, Plan 789
Appearances:
In Support:
Mr. P. Wiebe
203-67 Breckenridge Drive
Kitchener ON N2B 3R8
Contra: None
Written Submissions:
In Support: None
Contra: None
The Committee was advised that the applicant is proposing to erect a 1.5 m (4.92 ft.) high
illuminated ground sign, 0.915 m x 1.829 m (3 ft. x 6 ft.), on lands having frontage on Lancaster
Street West of 12.19 m (40 ft.), rather than the required 15.24 m (50 ft.), and at a distance of 14 m
(45.93 ft.) from an existing ground sign on an adjacent property, rather than the required 15 m
(49.21 ft.).
The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in which
they advised that the proposed ground sign is in compliance with all regulations regarding area,
height and setback. The existing lot is 12.19 m (40 ft.) wide, and therefore cannot comply with
the minimum lot width requirement, however, the existing lot width would still be adequate to
accommodate a ground sign of the proposed size without congesting the front yard area. The
reduction in separation distance between the proposed sign and existing KFC sign of 14.0 m
(45.93) is minimal, and will have no negative impact on the properties in the area.
Both the reduced lot width and reduced separation distance will maintain the intent of the Sign
By-law, and the proposed ground sign is appropriate for the property. There will be no impact on
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 15 AUGUST 15, 2000
1. Submission No.: SG 2000-006 (Cont'd)
neighbouring properties, and therefore the variance can be considered minor in nature. The
Traffic and Parking Division have no concerns with the proposed sign.
The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends approval of Submission SG
2000-006.
The Committee noted the comments of the Supervisor, Traffic & Parking Services, in which he
advised that the Traffic & Parking Division has reviewed this application and has no concerns with
the proposed sign location.
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 Planning & Culture Department, Region of Waterloo
in which they advised that they have reviewed the application and have no concerns; however,
any development on the subject land is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development
Charge By-law 99-038 or any successor thereof and 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 objections to this application.
The Chair reviewed the staff comments, noting that staff are recommending approval of the
application and inquired if Mr. Wiebe had anything further to add. Mr. P. Wiebe advised that he
had reviewed the staff comments and had nothing further to add.
As there were no further questions or comments forthcoming, the Chair called for a motion.
Moved by Mr. P. Kruse
Seconded by Mr. A. Galloway
That the application of the Mennonite Central Committee (ON) requesting permission to erect a
1.5 m (4.92 ft.) high illuminated ground sign, 0.915 m x 1.829 m (3 ft. x 6 ft.), on lands having
frontage on Lancaster Street West of 12.19 m (40 ft.), rather than the required 15.24 m (50 ft.),
and at a distance of 14 m (45.93 ft.) from an existing ground sign on an adjacent property, rather
than the required 15 m (49.21 ft.), on Lot 15, Plan 789, 335 Lancaster Street West, 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. P. Wiebe that the decision of the Committee is a recommendation to
Council, which will be considered at the Council meeting of August 28, 2000, 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 AUGUST 15, 2000
Submission No.:
Applicant:
Property Location:
Legal Description:
SG 2000-007
Radisson Hotel
2960 King Street East
Part of Lots 18, 19 & 20, Plan 958 and Part of Lots 4, 6 & 9, Plan 959,
designated as Parts 2 & 5 on Registered Plan 58R-7135
Appearances:
In Support:
Mr. J. Jefferson
Neon Products Ltd.
453 Chancellor Drive
Woodbridge ON L4L 5E1
Mr. P. Schweyer
Radisson Hotel
2960 King Street East
Kitchener ON N2A 1A9
Contra: None
Written Submissions:
In Support: None
Contra: None
The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to erect a pylon sign
having a sideyard setback from the lot line adjacent to King Street East of 0.15 m (6 in.), rather
than the required 0.4 m (1.31 ft.), and located 0.05 m (2 in.) from a vehicular parking area with a
3.66 m (12 ft.) clearance, rather than the required 4.3 m (14 ft.).
The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in
which they advised that the applicant requests permission to erect a pylon sign setback 0.15
metres (6 inches) from the lot line abutting King Street rather than the required minimum
setback of 0.4 metres (16 inches). Also, permission is required for clearance of the sign face
of 2.44 metres (8 feet) rather than the required 4.3 metres (14 feet) for a pylon sign within 0.6
metres (2 feet) of an area intended for vehicular traffic. The application requests clearance of
3.66 metres (12 feet) although the drawings show only 2.44 metres (8 feet).
The variance is requested because the proposed sign is a standard design that is used by the
Radisson Hotel chain throughout Ontario. The owner is of the opinion that making the sign
narrower would make it illegible to passing traffic. As noted on the attached site plan the
landscaped area owned by the hotel and abutting King Street is only 2 metres (6.7 metres)
wide and this limits the availability of locations for the sign.
The intent of the by-law regulations is to allow for unobstructed vehicular ingress and egress to
the commercial property. Regarding visibility, it is noted that the proposed sign will be located
near the corner of King Street and Morgan Avenue but outside the corner visibility triangle. As
well, the sign is at least 50 metres (164 feet) from the driveway access for the hotel/restaurant.
It is noted that the Traffic Division has no concerns with visibility for the proposed sign. Staff
are willing to support the variance to location.
Regarding the sign clearance, staff note that although this request asks for a reduction to 2.44
metres from 4.3 metres, it appears possible to redesign the sign and increase the clearance of
the sign face so that it would meet the regulation of the by-law. Therefore staff are of the
opinion that the variance request is not necessary for this regulation as compliance can be
achieved. Staff are of the opinion that the variance to clearance cannot be supported as it has
been submitted and recommend refusal.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 17 AUGUST 15, 2000
The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends approval of the requested
variance to location and refusal of the requested variance to clearance, as shown on the attached
drawings.
Submission No.: SG 2000-007 (Cont'd)
The Committee noted the comments of the Supervisor, Traffic & Parking Services, in which he
advised that the Traffic & Parking Division has reviewed this application and has no concerns with
the proposed sign location.
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 Grand River Conservation Authority in which they
advised that they have no objection to this application.
The Committee noted the comments of the Planning & Culture Department, Region of Waterloo
in which they advised that they have reviewed the application and have no concerns; however,
any development on the subject land is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development
Charge By-law 99-038 or any successor thereof and may require the payment of Regional
Development Charges for this development prior to the issuance of a building permit.
The Chair reviewed the staff comments, noting that staff are recommending approval of the
variance to location for the sign; however, are recommending refusal of the variance with respect
to the clearance of the sign face and enquired if the applicant had anything further to add.
Mr. J. Jefferson advised that the Radisson Hotel chain has developed a standard design to be
used throughout Ontario which is described as a Iow level monument type sign and, in his
opinion, is more aesthetically pleasing in keeping with the existing landscaping. Mr. Jefferson
provided the Committee with several pictures displaying a similar sign as well as the property in
question and pointed out that there was no other option for placement of the sign without having
to remove a parking spot. He further pointed out that if the sign were to be redesigned as
Planning staff have suggested it would result in a much taller, thinner sign that would encroach
into the crown of the trees and was not desirable from his clients point of view.
Ms. J. Given advised that the intent of the clearance regulation was to have unobstructed visibility
at a height conducive to being read by motorists. She stated that the sign as proposed falls
between the regulations for pylon and ground signs and advised that if it were the Committee's
wish to deal with the clearance issue that it may wish to consider approving the variances for
height and location based on a ground sign.
The Chair stated that he was of the opinion that whether it was called a ground or pylon sign, the
sign as proposed was more aesthetically pleasing, blending in with the existing landscaping. Mr.
P. Kruse agreed, noting that it would be better to have less in scope and integrated with the
landscaping on the property. Accordingly, Mr. Kruse advised that he was prepared to move
approval of the application.
A brief discussion was undertaken with respect to whether approval should be relative to a pylon
sign or a ground sign and it was agreed that the approval would be based on a pylon sign.
Moved by Mr. P. Kruse
Seconded by Mr. A. Galloway
That the application of the Radisson Hotel requesting permission to erect a pylon sign having a
sideyard setback of 0.15 m (6 in.)from the lot line adjacent to King Street East, rather than the
required 0.4 m (1.31 ft.), and for clearance of the sign face, located within 0.6 m (2 ft.) of an area
intended for vehicular traffic, of 2.44 m (8 ft.), rather than the required 4.3 m (14 ft.), on Part of
Lots 18, 19 & 20, Plan 958 and Part of Lots 4, 6 & 9, Plan 959, designated as Parts 2 & 5 on
Registered Plan 58R-7135, 2960 King Street East, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject
to the following condition:
That the variances as approved in this application shall be in accordance with the plans
submitted with Minor Variance Application, Submission No. SG 2000-007.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 18 AUGUST 15, 2000
Submission No.: SG 2000-007 (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.
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. Jefferson and Mr. Schweyer that the decision of the Committee is a
recommendation to Council, which will be considered at the Council meeting of August 28, 2000,
at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber and advised that they may register as a delegation to
appear before Council at that time.
Submission No.:
Applicant:
Property Location:
Legal Description:
SG 2000-008
McDonald's Restaurants
715 Ottawa Street South at Alpine Road
Block A, Registered Plan 1246, designated as Parts 7,
inclusive, Registered Plan 58R-12353
10 to 15
Mr. A. Galloway declared a pecuniary interest in this application as his firm has represented the
applicant on previous applications and did not participate in any discussion or voting with respect
to this application.
Mr. A. Galloway left the meeting during consideration of this application and, pursuant to the
Municipal Conflict of Interest Act, the application was considered by the remaining two members.
Appearances:
In Support:
Mr. V. Labreche
McDonald's Restaurants of Canada Limited
McDonald's Place
Toronto ON M3C 3L4
Mr. S. Faraji
Imperial Signs Ltd.
2465 Stevenage Drive, Unit 101
Ottawa ON K1G 3W2
Contra:
None
Written Submissions:
In Support:
Mr. V. Labreche
McDonald's Restaurants of Canada Limited
McDonald's Place
Toronto ON M3C 3L4
Contra: None
The Committee was advised that the lands involved in this application contain an existing plaza
which is being further developed to include a restaurant use (McDonald's). The applicant is
requesting permission to erect 2 drive-through directional ground signs both to be setback less
than the required 3 m (9.84 ft.) from the lot line. The first sign will be setback 0.61 m (2 ft) from
the lot line at the corner of the Alpine Road access into the plaza and the second sign will be
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 19 AUGUST 15, 2000
setback 0.15 m (6 in.) from the lot line adjacent to Ottawa Street South at the exit to the drive-
through. In addition, the applicant is requesting permission to erect 2 directional ground signs at
Submission No.: SG 2000-008 (Cont'd)
the entrance to the drive-through which will be located a distance of 12 m (39.37 ft.) apart, rather
than the required 15 m (49.21 ft.).
The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in which
they advised that the subject property has recently been severed from the abutting plaza at 725
Ottawa Street South and is now addressed as 715 Ottawa Street South.
The applicant requests permission to erect four ground signs that do not comply with the Sign By-
law. The first ground sign will be setback 0.61 metres (2 feet) from the lot line abutting Alpine
Road at the driveway access to the property. The second ground sign will be setback 0.15
metres (0.5 feet) from the lot line abutting Ottawa Street South near the northern most corner of
the property. The third and fourth signs are to be located at the entrance to the drive-through
which will be located 12 metres (39.37 feet) apart rather than the required 15 metres (49.21 feet).
Since submitting this application, the applicant has asked that a fifth ground sign be considered
with this application. The sign is to be located at the entrance to the plaza off of Ottawa Street
South on an easement created for McDonald's. The sign is proposed to be located
approximately 0.30 metres (1 ft.) from the Ottawa Street lot line. The attached site plan indicates
each sign by number. In addition, staff note that ground signs #1, #2 and #5, which are located in
front of the 6 metre building line setback, have a height of 1.549 metres (5.08 feet) which exceeds
the height regulation of 1.5 metres. Lastly, staff notes that signs # 5 and #2 are located less than
15 metres from another sign which is not permitted by the Sign By-law.
To legalize all that is requested, this application would have to be amended to request permission
for a total of five ground signs with variances as follows:
Sign
a)
b)
#1 - permission for a ground sign having a:
setback from the lot line abutting Alpine Road of 0.61 metres rather than the required
minimum of 3 metres;
height of 1.549 metres rather than the permitted maximum of 1.5 metres;
Sign
a)
b)
c)
#2 - permission for a ground sign having a:
setback from the lot line abutting Ottawa Street of 0.15 metres rather than the required
minimum of 3 metres
height of 1.549 metres rather than the permitted maximum of 1.5 metres;
separation distance of approximately 5 metres from a pylon sign rather than required
minimum separation of 15 metres;
Signs #3 and #4 - permission for two ground signs having a:
a) separation distance from each other of approximately 12 metres rather than the required
minimum of 15 metres;
Sign
a)
b)
c)
#5 - permission for a ground sign having a:
setback from the lot line abutting Ottawa Street of 0.3 metres rather than the required
minimum of 3 metres;
height of 1.549 metres rather than the permitted maximum of 1.5 metres;
separation distance of approximately 2 metres from a pylon sign rather than the required
minimum separation of 15 metres.
It is noted that three easements have been approved for McDonald's signs abutting the
driveways into and out of the plaza under application B2000-042 and shown on the attached
extract from the draft reference plan as Parts 1, 2 and 3. The applicant has only submitted an
application for one ground sign (#5 on attached plan) and not the other two. The easements
were created based on the signs being "incidental" which means that the signs have no
identifiable description or logo advertising the business. However, this application shows that
the proposed signs will contain the McDonald's arches, which therefore classifies them as
"ground" signs.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 20 AUGUST 15, 2000
3. Submission No.: SG 2000-008 (Cont'd)
The intent of the Sign By-law in limiting the height and setback from the lot line abutting a street of
the signs is to ensure that the signs are not in a visibility corner or distraction to passing vehicular
traffic. The intent of the separation distance between pylon/ground signs is to ensure that signs
are not clustered together which would not be aesthetically pleasing to the streetscape or
neighbourhood.
Signs # 1 and 5 are to be located at the driveway entrances to the property at Alpine Road and
Ottawa Street. Traffic Division staff have concerns regarding visibility and request that the sign
be located outside the 4.5 corner visibility triangles created by the lot lines and the driveways.
It is the opinion of staff that the proposed locations within the triangle do not meet the intent of
the by-law nor are minor in nature. It should be noted that by meeting the 4.5 metre corner
visibility triangle requirement, it is possible to locate the sign within the approved easement
area. However, there is limited room to meet both requirements. As well, sign #5 is to be
located only 2 metres from an existing pylon sign for the plaza rather than the required 15
metres. The reduced separation distance is 13% of the required separation distance and staff
are of the opinion that it would not be considered minor in nature. Aesthetically, the signs
would be too close together which would not be deemed appropriate development of the
property. Consequently, staff recommends refusal of the variances required for signs #1 and
5. The applicant may wish to consider adding the directional sign for McDonald's to the
existing pylon sign for the plaza instead of sign #5 (this would also require a variance as the
advertising would be considered "third party"). The applicant may also remove the arches so
that the signs may be deemed "incidental" and would not require a sign permit or variance
approval, although all signs cannot obstruct clear visibility of vehicular traffic and Traffic staff
should be consulted.
Sign #2 is to be located 0.15 metres from the lot line abutting Ottawa Street near the corner of
Alpine Road. The ground sign contains the McDonald's arches logo as advertising but is also
used for directional purposes at the exit of the drive-through. It is noted that the sign will not
pose a visibility concern, as it is not located in a corner visibility triangle. However, the sign will
be located approximately 5 metres from a pylon sign rather than the required 15 metres. The
pylon sign is used to advertise the business to vehicles traveling along Alpine Road and
Ottawa Street. However, the subject ground sign is smaller and located further into the
property from Ottawa Street and would therefore not be visually cluttering to traffic along the
street. The ground sign is to be used for directional purposes advising vehicles "not to enter".
Staff is of the opinion that the signs do not interfere or detract from each other as they are
viewed from different angles and the directional sign is required for safety purposes. Staff is of
the opinion that the variances required for sign #2 are appropriate. It is noted that the Traffic
Division has no concerns regarding vehicular visibility for signs #2, 3 or 4.
Signs #3 and 4 are used for directional purposes but also contain the McDonald's arches logo
for advertising purposes, which results in their being classified as ground signs. The signs are
located on either side of a parking area containing four parking spaces and will direct traffic to
the entrance of the drive-through. The signs are proposed to be located 12 metres apart
rather than the required 15 metres. The 3 metre reduced separation distance could be viewed
as minor in nature. As well vehicles parked in the spaces will visually separate the signs. Staff
is able to support this variance to signs #3 and 4.
Regarding the height of Signs #2, 3 and 4, staff is of the opinion that the proposed 1.529 metre
height is deemed to be minor in nature and meeting the intent of the Sign By-law, which
permits a height of 1.5 metres. They do not interfere with visibility and are required for the safe
flow of traffic on the premises. They could be considered appropriate development for the
property.
The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends approval of the minor variance
as amended for signs # 2, 3 and 4 only, as shown on the attached drawing. Staff recommends
refusal of signs #1 and 5 located within the driveway corner visibility triangles.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 21 AUGUST 15, 2000
Submission No.: SG 2000-008 (Cont'd)
The Committee noted the comments of the Supervisor, Traffic & Parking Services, in which he
advised that the Traffic & Parking Division has reviewed the application and note that the
entrance sign nearest Alpine Road as well as the two additional entrance signs at the Ottawa
Street access should be relocated outside the 4.5 m driveway corner visibility triangle.
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 Planning & Culture Department, Region of Waterloo
in which they advised that they have reviewed the application and have no concerns; however,
any development on the subject land is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development
Charge By-law 99-038 or any successor thereof and 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 objections to this application.
The Committee noted a written submission from Mr. V. Labreche, McDonald's Restaurants, dated
August 14, 2000, in which he advised that he wishes to amend the application as follows:
Si,qn #1
The variance request relative to the setback be deleted as the sign will be relocated 3 metres or
more from Alpine Road rather than 0.61 metres. The requested variance to the height of the
sign is still required.
Si,qn #2
Given recent discussions with the Regional Municipality of Waterloo regarding the purchase of
lands at the corner of Ottawa Street and Alpine Road (see attached plan), the location of sign #2
must be relocated.
As a result, a variance to the separation of the sign relative to the pylon sign is no longer required.
The sign will be located along Alpine Road, therefore a variance to the setback on Ottawa Street
is also no longer required. However, a 2.5 metre setback of the sign relative to Alpine Road is
requested whereas 3 metres is required.
Si.qns #3 and #4
No change requested.
Si.qn #5
The "McDonald's Arches Logo" will be removed from this sign. Therefore no variance, as
requested in the application, is required.
In summary, the following is the requested variances, as revised:
Si,qn #1:
· Sign height of 1.549 metres rather than 1.5 metres.
Si.qn #2
· Height of 1.549 metres rather than 1.5 metres.
· A 2.5 metre setback from Alpine Road rather than 3 metres.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 22 AUGUST 15, 2000
3. Submission No.: SG 2000-008 (Cont'd)
Si.qns #3 and #4
· No change request, as per original application.
Si.qn #5
· Design of sign will not include any Corporate logo, therefore no variances required.
The Chair reviewed the staff comments, noting that staff are recommending approval of the
application subject to various amendments and inquired if Mr. Labreche had anything further to
add.
Mr. V. Labreche referred to his letter dated August 14, 2000, in which he outlined various
requests to amend the application. Mr. Labreche reviewed the amendments with respect to Sign
#1 requesting a height variance of 1.549 m rather than 1.5 m and suggesting that a variance for a
setback from the lot line abutting Alpine Road is no longer required as the sign will be located
setback 3 m or more. Mr. Labreche pointed out that while the sign will be setback 3 m meeting
the requirements of the Sign By-law, it is intended to locate the sign along the curb line which
may not meet the 4.5 m setback for daylight triangle as regulated by the Traffic & Parking
Division.
The Chair requested staff to comment and Ms. J. Given advised that staff of the Traffic & Parking
Division will only support the sign if it is located outside the 4.5 m daylight triangle.
Following further discussion with regard to the location of Sign #1, it was agreed that the
Committee would support a 2.5 m setback variance provided the sign was located outside of the
4.5 m daylight triangle, a height variance of 1.549 m and the sign is to be located within a 10 ft.
distance from the daylight triangle.
The Committee then reviewed the requested amendments for Signs 2, 3, 4 and 5 and were in
agreement with the amendments, as requested.
Moved by Mr. P. Kruse
Seconded by Mr. S. Kay
That the application of McDonald's Restaurants of Canada Limited requesting permission to erect
4 ground signs as follows:
a)
Sign #1 having a height of 1.549 m (5.08 ft.), rather than the permitted 1.5 m (4.92 ft.), and
having a setback of 2.5 m (8.2 ft.) from the lot line adjacent to Alpine Road, rather than the
required 3 m (9.84 ft.), subject to the following conditions:
1)
that the sign shall be located outside of the 4.5 m (14.76 ft.) daylight visibility
triangle; and,
2)
that the sign shall be located within a 3 m (9.84 ft.) distance from the daylight
visibility triangle;
b)
Sign #2 having a setback of 2.5 m (8.2 ft.) from the lot line adjacent to Alpine Road, rather
than the required 3 m (9.84 ft.) and having a height of 1.549 m (5.08 ft.), rather than the
permitted 1.5 m (4.92 ft.); and,
c)
Sign #'s 3 & 4 having a separation distance from each other of 12 m (39.37 ft.), rather than
the required 15 m (49.21 ft.);
with all sign locations as shown numerically on the revised plan dated August 14, 2000 and as
submitted to the Committee of Adjustment on August 15, 2000;
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 23 AUGUST 15, 2000
on Block A, Registered Plan 1246, designated as Parts 7, 10 to 15 inclusive, on Registered Plan
58R-12353, 715 Ottawa Street South at Alpine Road, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED.
Submission No.: SG 2000-008 (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.
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. Labreche that the decision of the Committee is a recommendation to
Council, which will be considered at the Council meeting of August 28, 2000, 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:
SG 2000-009
MTD Products Limited
61 Kent Avenue
Part Lots 447 to 454, Plan 262, designated as Parts
Reference Plan 58R-4322
1 &2on
In Support:
Ms. S. Levant
Pride Signs Ltd.
280 Holiday Inn Drive
Cambridge ON N3C lZ4
Contra: None
Written Submissions:
In Support: None
Contra: None
The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to erect a ground sign
having a height of 1.905 m (6.25 ft.), rather than the permitted 1.5 m (4.92 ft.) and a setback 0.4
m (1.31 ft.) from the property line adjacent to Kent Avenue, rather than the required 6 m (19.68
ft.).
The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in which
they advised that the property is located on Kent Avenue, and is one of the MTD Products Limited
facilities within the area. This facility has a building setback from the front property line of
approximately 7.0 m (22.96 ft.). The applicant proposes the sign to have a setback of 0.4 m (1.31
ft.) from the front property line to ensure the sign is clearly visible. A reduction in height to the
permitted 1.5 m (4.92 ft.) would not be possible due to poor visibility from snow accumulation in
the winter months.
The proposed sign will be located well away from the driveway access to the facility. The
reduced setback of 0.4 m (1.31 ft.), and height increase to 1.905 m (6.25 ft.) provides adequate
visibility to and from the site as there is a 3.76 m (12.33 ft.) boulevard between the sign location
and the back edge of the curb. This will ensure clear and unobstructed visibility for both vehicular
and pedestrian movements to and from the site. The Traffic and Parking Division has no
concerns with the proposed location of the ground sign.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 24 AUGUST 15, 2000
The proposed ground sign will not impact neighbouring properties and can be considered minor
in nature. Approval of this variance maintains the general intent and purpose of the Sign By-law
and is appropriate for the MTD Products Limited facility.
4. Submission No.: SG 2000-009 (Cont'd)
The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends approval of Submission SG
2000-009.
The Committee noted the comments of the Supervisor, Traffic & Parking Services, in which he
advised that the Traffic & Parking Division has reviewed this application and has no concerns with
the proposed sign location.
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 Planning & Culture Department, Region of Waterloo
in which they advised that they have reviewed the application and have no concerns; however,
any development on the subject land is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development
Charge By-law 99-038 or any successor thereof and 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 the entire property is located within the floodplain of Schneider Creek and is
consequently regulated by the Grand River Conservation Authority under Ontario Regulation 149
as amended by 69/93, 669/94 and 142/98. However, please be advised that we have no
objection to the passing of the proposed variance to the Sign By-law to allow the erection of the
sign.
The Chair reviewed the staff comments, noting that staff are recommending approval of the
application and inquired if Ms. Levant had anything further to add. Ms. Levant advised that she
had reviewed the staff comments and was in agreement with the recommendation contained
therein.
As there were no further questions or comments forthcoming, the Chair called for a motion.
Moved by Mr. P. Kruse
Seconded by Mr. A. Galloway
That the application of MTD Products Limited requesting permission to erect a ground sign
having a height of 1.905 m (6.25 ft.), rather than the permitted 1.5 m (4.92 ft.) and setback 0.4 m
(1.31 ft.) from the property line adjacent to Kent Avenue, rather than the required 3 m (9.84 ft.), on
Part Lots 447 to 454, Plan 262, designated as Parts 1 & 2, Registered Plan 58R-4322, 61 Kent
Avenue, 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 Ms. Levant that the decision of the Committee is a recommendation to
Council, which will be considered at the Council meeting of August 28, 2000, at 7:00 p.m., in the
Council Chamber and advised that she may register as a delegation to appear before Council at
that time.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 25 AUGUST 15, 2000
ADJOURNMENT
On motion, the meeting adjourned at 10:30 a.m.
Dated at the City of Kitchener this 15th day of August, 2000.
J. Billett
Secretary-Treasurer
Committee of Adjustment