HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdjustment - 2002-01-08 SGCOMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT
FOR THE
CITY OF KITCHENER
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD JANUARY 8, 2002
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Messrs. P. Kruse, S. Kay, and D. Cybalski.
OFFICIALS PRESENT:
Ms. J. Given, Principal Planner and Ms. J. Billett, Secretary-Treasurer.
Mr. P. Kruse, Vice-Chair, called this meeting to order at 10:00 a.m.
This meeting of the Committee of Adjustment sitting 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 the 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, January 14, 2002, 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.:
1.SG 2002-001
Applicant:
Peter Simac
Property Location:
249 Courtland Avenue East
Legal Description:
Part Lot 22, Subdivision of Lot 18, German Company Tract
Appearances:
In Support:Mr. S. Catalano Mr. & Mrs. P. Simac
Pattison Outdoor Advertising 249 Courtland Ave. E.
2285 Wyecroft Rd. Kitchener, ON N2G 2V6
Oakville, ON L6L 5L7
Contra:None
Written Submissions:
In Support:None
Contra:None
The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to add 2 billboard sign
faces to an existing sign for a total of 4 sign faces rather than the permitted 2 and having a
sign height of 8.8 m (29 ft.) rather than the permitted 7.5 m (24.6 ft.).
The Committee noted the comments of Business and Planning Services in which they advised
that the applicant requests permission to add two side-by-side billboard sign faces above an
existing billboard sign structure containing two side-by-side sign faces to create a total of 4 sign
faces rather than the permitted maximum of two, and for the sign to have a height of 8.8 metres
(29 feet) rather than the permitted 7.5 metres (24.6 feet).
It is noted that the variance request for sign height was written incorrectly on the application. The
submitted sign drawings show that the proposed addition of two sign faces will add 4.26 metres
(14 feet) to the existing 7.62 metres (25 feet) for a total sign height of 11.88 metres (38.98 feet).
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENTJANUARY 8, 2002
2
Submission No.:
1. SG 2002-001 (Cont’d)
The existing billboard sign structure was issued a sign permit in 1994. In 1995, Council
implemented strict regulations to control the proliferation of billboards in the City because of
aesthetic concerns regarding the visual impact of the signs on the streetscape.
The requested variance to sign height will add 4.38 metres (14.37 ft) above the 7.5 metre
permitted maximum which exceeds the Sign By-law requirement by 59%. As well, the addition of
two sign faces results in a total of four faces that can be viewed from the street. This is twice the
maximum number of sign faces permitted. The visual impact of this proposed sign is significant
and would add to the proliferation of billboards in the City.
Based on the above comments, staff is of the opinion that the proposed variance for sign height,
combined with the variance to the number of sign faces permitted, is too great and cannot be
deemed minor in nature nor desirable and appropriate. The proposed sign does not maintain
Council's intent as set out in the current Sign By-law regulations.
Accordingly, Business and Planning Services recommends refusal of minor variance application
SG2002-001.
The Committee noted the comments of the Director of Building in which he advised that Building
has no concerns with respect to this application subject to a professional engineer being retained
to design and review construction of the sign exceeding 7.5 metres in height.
The Committee noted the comments of the Grand River Conservation Authority in which they
advised that while a large portion of the property lies below the Regulatory Flood Line Elevation of
Schneider creek, the proposed location of the additional signs is outside the floodplain and,
accordingly, we have no objection to the proposal.
The Committee noted the comments of the Traffic and Parking Analyst and the Region of
Waterloo in which they advised that they have no concerns or comments with respect to this
application.
The Chair reviewed the staff comments, noting that staff are recommending refusal of the
application and inquired if the applicants had anything further to add.
Mr. S. Catalano, agent for Mr. & Mrs. Simac, advised that the existing sign as erected in 1994
was permissible at that time and what is being requested in the minor variance application this
date would also have been permissible in 1994. In 1995, he noted that City Council revised
regulations pertaining to billboard signs to control the proliferation of such signs. While he agreed
with the need to control proliferation, he stated that the by-law does not allow for site specific
consideration and expressed the opinion that the additional sign faces and sign height requested
would not have any negative impact to the surrounding area. He pointed out that to the south
there is only a gravel parking lot and the subject property is not located in a commercial strip.
Mrs. P. Simac advised that the property is located at the corner of Courtland Avenue and Stirling
Avenue and with the grade of Stirling Avenue, the sign would barely be visible at street level. She
further clarified that there is no residential property in the immediate vacinity, pointing out that the
parking lot for Schneider’s is behind and the remainder of the property is surrounded by bush and
railroad. She stated that the sign would only be visible from Stirling Avenue.
Mr. Catalano and Mrs. Simac provided photographs of the property and existing sign for review
by the Committee.
In response to a question from Mr. D. Cybalski, Mr. Catalano advised that the height of the
existing sign from ground level is approximately 7.5 metres which is the standard permitted by the
Sign By-law.
In response to questions from the Committee, Ms. J. Given advised that the impact to residential
property is not really the issue as billboard signs are not permitted in residential areas. The issue
from staff’s point of view relates to the streetscape and how dominant in size and mass the sign
would be; and, she further stated that staff do not consider the additional sign height to be minor
in nature.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENTJANUARY 8, 2002
3
Submission No.:
1.SG 2002-001 (Cont’d)
Mr. S. Kay stated that his opinion was similar to that of the comments of staff and expressed
concern with the proposed height of the sign and the proposed double facing of the sign. In his
opinion, approval of the application would result in unwarranted proliferation of this type of sign.
As there were no further questions or comments forthcoming, the Chair called for a motion.
Moved by Mr. S. Kay
Seconded by Mr. D. Cybalski
That the application of Peter Simac requesting permission to add 2 side-by-side side billboard
sign faces above an existing billboard sign structure containing 2 side-by-side sign faces to
create a total of 4 sign faces, rather than the permitted maximum of 2, and having a maximum
sign height of 11.88 m (38.98 ft), on Part of Lot 22, Subdivision of Lot 18, German Company
BE REFUSED.
Tract, 249 Courtland Avenue East, Kitchener, Ontario,
It is the opinion of this Committee that:
1. The variances requested in this application are 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) is not being maintained on the subject property.
Carried
The Chair advised those in attendance that the decision of the Committee is a recommendation
to Council, which will be considered at the Council meeting of January 14, 2002 at 7:00 p.m. in
the Council Chamber and they may register as a delegation to appear before Council at that time.
Submission No.:
2.SG 2002-002
Applicant:
Blue Spruce Properties Inc./George & Jo Weiland/Linda Morrison
Property Location:
1595-1601 Victoria Street North
Legal Description:
Part Lot 123, German Company Tract
Appearances:
In Support:Ms. L. Morrison
1595 -1601 Victoria St. N.
Kitchener, ON N2B 3E6
Contra:None
Written Submissions:
In Support:None
Contra:None
The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to erect an illuminated
pylon sign having a maximum height of 9.14 m (29.98 ft.) rather than the permitted 7.5 m (24.6
22
ft.) and a maximum area of 20.4 m (219.59 sq. ft.) rather than the permitted 20 m(215.28
sq. ft.).
The Committee noted the comments of Business and Planning Services in which they advised
that the applicant is requesting permission to erect a pylon sign having a height of 9.14 metres
(30 ft.) rather than the permitted 7.5 metres (24.6 ft.) and having an area of 20.4 square metres
22
(220 ft.) rather than the permitted 20 square metres (215.2 ft.), to replace an existing pylon sign.
The applicant advises that a sign of this size is required to be able to accommodate the names of
10 of the more than 32 tenants in the buildings on the property.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENTJANUARY 8, 2002
4
Submission No.:
2. SG 2002-002 (Cont’d)
The proposal is for a pylon sign having a sign face, 3 metres (10 ft.) wide and 6.7 metres (22 ft.)
2
high, for a sign face area of 20.4 square metres (220 ft.). With the required 2.44 metres (8 ft.) of
clearance beneath the sign face, the total sign height would be 9.14 metres (30 ft.). The
proposed sign would exceed the permitted maximum height of 7.5 metres (24.6 ft.) by 1.64
2
metres (5.4 ft.) and exceed the maximum sign area by 0.4 square metres (1.3 ft.).
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
on the streetscape. The proposed sign height and area are not out of proportion with the 2.29
acre property which abuts a primary arterial road and is surrounded by other commercial and
industrial properties. The proposed sign would be complementary to the size of the lot and would
provide good visibility to a high volume of traffic along Victoria Street.
Staff are of the opinion that one pylon sign slightly larger than permitted by the Sign By-law is
more aesthetically pleasing to the streetscape than would numerous 7.5 metre (24.6 ft.) high
signs.
Based on the above comments, it is the opinion of staff that the requested variances for sign
height and area are minor in nature and meet the general intent of the Sign By-law.
Business and Planning Services recommends approval of Submission SG2002-002 provided the
existing pylon sign is removed.
The Committee considered the comments of the Director of Building in which he advised that
Building has no concerns with this application subject to a professional engineer being retained to
design and review construction of the sign exceeding 7.5 metres in height.
The Committee noted the comments of the Traffic & Parking Analyst in which he advised that
Traffic staff can only recommend approval of the sign location if the sign is located outside the
4.57 metre driveway triangle.
The Committee noted the comments of the Region of Waterloo and the Grand River
Conservation Authority in which they advised that they have no concerns or comments with
respect to this application.
The Chair reviewed the staff comments, noting that staff are recommending approval of the
application subject to certain conditions.
In response to Mr. S. Kay, Ms. Morrison advised that the proposed sign is to replace an existing
pylon sign that is in disrepair and aesthetically unpleasing. She noted that since purchasing the
property 3 years ago improvements have been made and replacing the sign was chosen as an
enhancement for the property this year.
Ms. Morrison further clarified that there are 2 pylon signs on the property with a smaller pylon sign
located further down the boulevard; however, it is the larger of the 2 pylon signs that is proposed
to be replaced.
As there were no further questions or comments forthcoming, the Chair called for a motion.
Moved by Mr. S. Kay
Seconded by Mr. D. Cybalski
That the application of Blue Spruce Properties Inc., George and Joe Weiland and Linda
Morrison requesting permission to erect an illuminated pylon sign having a maximum height of
9.14 m (29.98 ft.), rather than the permitted 7.5 m (24.6 ft.) and a maximum area of 20.4 m²
(219.59 sq. ft.), rather than the permitted 20 m² (215.28 sq. ft.), on Part of Lot 123, German
BE APPROVED
Company Tract, 1595-1601 Victoria Street North, Kitchener, Ontario, , subject
to the following conditions:
1. That the existing pylon sign shall be removed.
2. That a professional engineer shall be retained to design and review construction of the sign
to the satisfaction of the Director of Building.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENTJANUARY 8, 2002
5
Submission No.:
2. SG 2002-002 (Cont’d)
3. That the sign shall be located outside the 4.57 m (14.99 ft.) driveway visibility triangle.
It is the opinion of this Committee that:
1. The variances requested 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 advised Ms. Morrison that the decision of the Committee is a recommendation to
Council, which will be considered at the Council meeting of January 14, 2002 at 7:00 p.m. in
the Council Chamber and she may register as a delegation to appear before Council at that
time.
Submission No.:
3.SG 2002-003
Applicant:
142852 Ontario Inc.
Property Location:
245 Strasburg Road
Legal Description:
Part Lots 4 and 5, Registered Plan 1022, Part Lot 9, Registered
Plan 1021, designated as Parts 10 to 14 inclusive on Reference
Plan 58R-12520
Appearances:
In Support:None
Contra:None
Written Submissions:
In Support:None
Contra:None
The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to erect a pylon sign
2 2
having a maximum sign area of 40 m (430.57 sq. ft.) rather than the permitted 20m (215.28
sq. ft.), and having a maximum height of 11 m (36 ft.) rather than the permitted 7.5 m (24.6 ft.);
and to permit non-accessory copy on the sign to advertise other commercial businesses
located on abutting properties.
The Committee noted the comments of Business and Planning Services in which they advised
that after reviewing the application, it is noted that the above request is based on the written
portion of the application to permit a sign area of up to 40 square metres. However, the sign
drawing submitted with the application indicates that the sign will have an area of 53.6 square
metres (576.96 square feet). As well, two additional variances would be required. The
application does not indicate a setback for the sign from the rear lot line but the drawing
submitted appears to indicate that the sign will be located up to the rear lot line. This would result
in a variance for the sign to have a 0-metre setback rather than the 0.4 metre setback from any
lot line. The Sign By-law also requires a clearance from grade to the lowest attached component
of the sign of 4.3 metres (14.1 feet) when the sign is located within 0.6 metres (2 feet) of an area
intended for vehicular traffic. The submitted site plan indicates that the sign will be partially
located in a lane of the parking lot with a clearance of 2.42 metres (7.9 feet) and therefore does
not comply with the Sign By-law.
The applicant is requesting this variance because they are of the opinion that given the size,
nature and extent of the development proposed the Sign By-law cannot adequately service the
proposed tenants of the development.
The intent of the pylon sign regulations is to ensure that the sign does not dominate the
landscape of the property and does not interfere with vehicular traffic.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENTJANUARY 8, 2002
6
Submission No.:
3. SG 2002-003 (Cont’d)
Planning staff state that site plan approval for this portion of the property is not yet final and they
have concerns regarding the sign's location, and reduced clearance, within a two-way truck route
lane. Consequently, Planning staff considers this application premature.
Because of staff concerns regarding the location of the sign it is suggested that this variance
request be deferred in order that the applicant and staff may meet to discuss these concerns, with
the aim of revising the location and required variances.
Accordingly, Business and Planning Services recommends deferral of minor variance application
SG2002-003 to the meeting of January 29, 2002.
The Committee noted the comments of the Director of Building in which he advised that Building
has no concerns with respect to this application subject to a professional engineer being retained
to design and review construction of the sign exceeding 7.5 m in height.
The Committee noted the comments of the Region of Waterloo in which they advised that the
proposed sign appears to be adjacent to the Highway 7 & 8 road allowance and will therefore
require approval from the Ministry of Transportation.
The Committee noted the comments of the Ministry of Transportation in which they advised that
this sign exceeds the Ministry’s sign policy height and size restrictions for commercial plaza
signing and therefore this office objects to the variance. The maximum size of this sign is to be
600 sq. ft. (55 m²) based on a double sided sign; 300 sq. ft. (28 m²) per side. The maximum
height allowed is 35 ft (10 m). The above sizes are based on the sign being placed 200 ft. (61 m)
or less from the highway property line.
The Committee noted the comments of the Traffic & Parking analyst and the Grand River
Conservation Authority in which they advised that they have no concerns or comments with
respect to this application .
The Chair advised that Business and Planning Services staff are recommending deferral of the
application for the purpose of revising the location of the sign and required variances.
As there was no one in attendance to support the application, the Committee agreed to defer this
application as requested by staff to the Committee of Adjustment meeting to be held on Tuesday,
January 29, 2002.
Submission No.:
4.SG 2002-004
Applicant:
Loblaw Properties Limited
Property Location:
750 Ottawa Street South
Legal Description:
Part Lot 4, Registered Plan 1022, Part Lot 9, Registered Plan 1021
designated as Parts 1 to 4 inclusive on Reference Plan 58R-12520
Appearances:
In Support:None
Contra:None
Written Submissions:
In Support:None
Contra:None
The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to erect a pylon sign
2 2
having a maximum sign area of 40 m (430.57 sq. ft.) rather than the permitted 20m (215.28
sq. ft.), and having a maximum height of 11 m (36 ft.) rather than the permitted 7.5 m (24.6 ft.);
and to permit non-accessory copy on the sign to advertise other commercial businesses
located on abutting properties.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENTJANUARY 8, 2002
7
Submission No.:
4. SG 2002-004 (Cont’d)
The Committee noted the comments of Business and Planning Services in which they advised
that after reviewing the application, staff notes that the written request to vary the sign height
does not correspond with the sign drawings submitted. The drawings indicate a total sign height
of 12.8 metres (41.99 feet). As well, an additional variance exists as the drawing indicates a
clearance from grade to sign of 2.346 metres (7.69 feet) whereas 2.44 metres (8 feet) is required.
The applicant is requesting this variance because it is their opinion that given the size, nature and
extent of development of the property, the Sign By-law cannot adequately service the proposed
tenants.
The intent of the regulations for pylon signs is to ensure that the sign is aesthetically pleasing and
does not dominate the streetscape. The proposed sign is 5.3 metres (17.39 feet) higher than
permitted.
The sign is to be located 0.5 metres (1.64 feet) from the lot line abutting Ottawa Street, which
complies with the by-law. However, considering the overall size of the sign structure, including its
total width of 6.499 metres (21.32 feet), and its location so close to the lot line, the sign would
greatly dominant the streetscape on both sides of Ottawa Street. In addition, as this site has not
received final site plan approval staff have concerns regarding the proposed location. It is noted
that one proposed site plan design may require a Regional road widening to develop a
deceleration lane into the property. As final site plan details have yet to be confirmed, staff
considers this application premature.
Because of staff concerns regarding the extent of the variances, as well as the sign location, it is
suggested that this variance request be deferred in order that the applicant and staff may meet to
discuss concerns regarding the sign and its location, with the aim of revising the location and
required variances.
Accordingly, Business and Planning Services recommends deferral of minor variance application
SG2002-004 to the meeting of January 29, 2002.
The Committee noted the comments of the Director of Building in which he advised that Building
has no concerns with respect to this application subject to a professional engineer being retained
to design and review construction of the sign exceeding 7.5 m in height.
The Committee noted the comments of the Region of Waterloo in which they advised that the
proposed location of this sign will be on the Ottawa Street road allowance and the sign must be
relocated onto private property.
The Committee noted the comments of the Ministry of Transportation in which they advised that
the Ministry does not anticipate any problem with the highway system as a result of this
application. The proposed sign is not adjacent to Highway 7 & 8 and will not be within sight
distance to the highway as a result of the proposed development.
The Committee noted the comments of the Traffic & Parking Analyst in which he advised that
Traffic staff can only recommend approval of the sign location if the sign is located outside the
4.57 m (14.99 ft.) driveway visibility triangle and not on municipal property.
The Committee noted the comments of the Grand River Conservation Authority in which they
advised that they have no concerns or comments with respect to this application.
The Chair reviewed the staff comments, noting that staff are recommending deferral of the
application to allow an opportunity to revise the location of the sign and required variances.
As no one was in attendance to support this application, it was agreed to defer the application to
the Committee of Adjustment meeting scheduled to be held on Tuesday, January 29, 2002.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENTJANUARY 8, 2002
8
ADJOURNMENT
On motion, the meeting adjourned at 10:21 a.m.
th
Dated at the City of Kitchener this 8 day of January, 2002.
J. Billett
Secretary-Treasurer
Committee of Adjustment