Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdjustment - 2000-11-21 SIGCOA\2000-11-21-SIGN COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE CITY OF KITCHENER MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 21, 2000 MEMBERS PRESENT: Messrs. B. Dahms, S. Kay, A. Galloway and P. Kruse. OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ms. J. Given, Principal Planner and Ms. J. Billett, Secretary-Treasurer. Mr. B. Dahms, Chair, called this meeting to order at 10:02 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, December 18, 2000 at 7:00 p.m. and the applicants may register with the City Clerk to appear at the meeting if desired. NEW BUSINESS Submission No.: Applicant: Property Location: Le.qal Description: SG 2000-012 Sunralf Holdings Inc. 600 Fairway Road South Part Lot 18, Re.qistered Plan 988 Appearances: In Support: None Contra: None Written Submissions: In Support: None Contra: None As the applicant was not in attendance to support the application, the Committee temporarily delayed consideration of this application to allow an opportunity for the applicant to arrive. The Committee then recessed the meeting temporarily, at 10:04 a.m., and reconvened at 10:50 a.m. 1. Submission No.: SG 2000-012 (Cont'd) The Committee was advised by Ms. J. Given that she had contacted the applicant by telephone during recess of the meeting who had advised that he had confused the date of the meeting. The applicant further advised that he could attempt to have someone attend the meeting if the Committee was willing to wait. The Chair suggested that, as the Committee has the right to deal with an application in the absence of an applicant having been given due notice, and staff are recommending approval of the application, the Committee proceed to consider the matter. The other members of the Committee concurred with this suggestion. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 31 NOVEMBER 21, 2000 1. Submission No.: SG 2000-012 (Cont'd) The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to erect a projecting sign on to the top of an existing commercial structure (Hakim Optical) having a maximum area of 7.5 m2 (80.73 sq. ft.), being 44% of the area of the portion of the wall on which the sign is to be erected, rather than the permitted 15% (2.54 m2 -27.34 sq. ft.). The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in which they advised that staff note the actual wall area to which each sign is to be attached is 19.2 m2 (206.7 sq. ft.), which will reduce the sign coverage to 39% of the wall area. By definition in the Sign By-law the proposed signs are projecting signs, as the definition states: "a sign attached to a wall, whose copy surface is not parallel to that wall." The coverage regulations are more stringent for projecting signs, being 15% rather than fascia signs which allow 30% wall coverage. The construction of the building is such that the perimeter of the main building is covered by a large awning eliminating the opportunity for any fascia or projecting signs in this area. The portion of the wall on which the signs are to be installed is actually a cantilevered wall/roof extension on top of the main building, set back several feet from the edge of the main wall, with a sloping face. As the signs consist of individual letters, the actual area would be less than the quoted 39%, but for sign permit purposes the area is calculated by creating a box around the perimeter of the proposed sign. The proposed signs comply in all other aspects with the Sign By-law. The property has been previously occupied by a restaurant which also had signage on this section of the wall. Considering the location of the signs on the wall extension, staff are of the opinion that the proposed signs maintain the intent of the Sign By-law since the lower walls are not overpowered by signs and the signs function more like fascia signs. The proposed signs are appropriate for the building and the impact of the variance can be considered minor given the location of the signs. The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends approval of Submission SG 2000-012. 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. 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 enquired if members of the Committee had any further questions. Mr. S. Kay posed several questions with respect to the location and size of the proposed sign and Ms. Given responded that the sign will project approximately 1 to 2 ft. from the wall of the roof and will exceed the maximum coverage allowed for a projecting sign by 24%. The sign cannot be considered a fascia sign which permits a maximum of 30% coverage because it is not perpendicular to the wall; however, Ms. Given pointed out that even if it were considered a fascia sign it would still exceed the maximum percentage of coverage allowed. The Chair noted that the projection of the sign from the wall of the roof still does not protrude beyond the outer most wall of the existing structure and was inclined to support the application. Mr. A. Galloway stated that he was prepared to move approval of the application as amended to permit two projecting signs having a maximum coverage of wall area of 39%. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 32 NOVEMBER 21, 2000 1. Submission No.: SG 2000-012 (Cont'd) Moved by Mr. A. Galloway Seconded by Mr. P. Kruse That the application of Sunralf Holdings Inc. requesting permission to erect 2 projecting signs on an existing commercial building (Hakim Optical) each having an area of 7.5 m2 (80.73 sq. ft.), being 39% of the area (19.2 m2 - 206.7 sq. ft.) of the portion of the wall on which the signs are to be erected, rather than the permitted 15%, on Part of Lot 18, Registered Plan 988, 600 Fairway Road South, 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 again noted that the decision of the Committee is a recommendation to Council, which will be considered at the Council meeting of December 18, 2000, at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber and the applicant may register as a delegation to appear before Council at that time. The Chair requested the Secretary-Treasurer to so notify the applicant and the Secretary- Treasurer concurred. ADJOURNMENT On motion, the meeting adjourned at 10:55 a.m. Dated at the City of Kitchener this 21st day of November, 2000. J. Billett Secretary-Treasurer Committee of Adjustment