Sign Variance Committee
The full agenda, as filed
All 2 items in the clerk’s order. Each carries the city’s own words: the staff recommendation, what the body decided, and its status. Nothing below is written by us.
SB12.1adopted
Due to Construction Media has stated that they have been authorized by the owner of the property municipally known as 115 Belfield Road (the "Applicant"), to apply for three variances required to allow for a permit to be issued for one third party electronic ground sign with two sign faces, displaying electronic static copy (the "Proposed Sign") at 115 Belfield Road. The Proposed Sign requires three variances as it is proposed to be located along the north frontage of 115 Belfield Road, which is a location which is subject to two different area-specific prohibitions on any third-party signs being erected or displayed, and due to the fact that the Proposed Sign would be located within minimum 150 metres spacing distance applicable to third-party electronic ground signs and other third party signs. The Proposed Sign would have a height of 7.62 metres, and would contain two sign faces, in a "back to back" configuration, each measuring 5.79 metres horizontally by 2.91 metres vertically, with a sign face area of 16.85 square metres. The Proposed Sign which is described further in Attachment 1, complies with many of the provisions regulating third party electronic ground signs in sign districts where such signs are permitted. However, the Proposed Sign would be located on premises which is the subject of two separate City Council enacted Site-specific area restrictions prohibiting any third party signs from being erected or displayed. Three variances to Chapter 694 are required to allow the Chief Building Official ("CBO") to issue the sign permit for the Proposed Sign. The requirements in Chapter 694 which have been requested to vary, are as below: 1. § 694-22.E- A third party electronic sign, as permitted by Subsections 694-25A(2), C(2), D(3), D(4), 694-26I(1), (2) and (3) shall not be erected within 150.0 metres of any other lawful third party sign whether or not erected. The Proposed Sign would be within approximately 140 meters of another third party sign located at 1065 Martin Grove Road. 2. § 694-24.A (16) - A third party sign shall not be erected or displayed or caused to be erected or displayed in whole or in part within 400 metres of any limit of any portion of Highway 409 contained within the municipal boundaries of the City - The Proposed Sign would be located within 400 metres of the northern limit of Highway 409 (specifically approximately 200 meters to the north of Highway 409. 3. § 694-24.A (30) - A third party sign shall not be erected or displayed or caused to be erected or displayed in whole or in part on the premises municipally known as 115 Belfield Road or on any other premises within 100 metres of any limit of the premises municipally known as 115 Belfield Road - The Proposed Sign would be located on the premises municipally known as 115 Belfield Road. Following a review of the Applicant's submissions and the results of research and investigation by Sign By-law Unit staff, the CBO has determined that insufficient information has been provided to establish that the Proposed Sign meets all nine of the criteria established in §694-30A of the Sign By-law. Specifically, there is insufficient information to establish that the Proposed Sign: is compatible with the development of the premises and surrounding area; supports the Official Plan objectives for the subject premises and surrounding area; will not alter the character of the premises and surrounding area and, is not contrary to the public interest. Therefore, the CBO does not support the Sign Variance Committee granting the two requested variances for the Proposed Sign.
The Sign Variance Committee: 1. Refused to grant the three requested variances to sections 694-22.E, 694-24.A(16) and 694-24.A(30) required to allow for the issuance of a permit respecting the erection and display of the Proposed Sign at the property municipally known as 115 Belfield Road as described in Attachment 1 to this report (July 28, 2021) from the Manager, Sign By-law Unit, Toronto Building.
Staff recommendation as filed
The Chief Building Official and Executive Director, Toronto Building, recommends that: 1. The Sign Variance Committee refuse to grant the three requested variances to sections 694-22.E, 694-24.A(16) and 694-24.A(30) required to allow for the issuance of a permit respecting the erection and display of the Proposed Sign at the property municipally known as 115 Belfield Road as described in Attachment 1 to this report.
SB12.2adopted
Outfront Media has stated that they have been authorized by the owner, 1369182 Ontario Inc. (the "Applicant") of the property municipally known as 2568 St. Clair Avenue West (the "Premises"), to represent them in applying for three variances (each to be subject to four conditions) required to allow for a permit to be issued for one third party electronic ground sign with two sign faces (the "Proposed Sign") on the Premises. The Proposed Sign will have a height of 7.98 meters, and would contain two sign faces, displaying electronic static copy, in a v-shape configuration, each sign face measuring 2.30 meters vertically by 8.69 meters horizontally. The Proposed Sign would be located along the southerly property frontage of the Premises, would have a setback of 0.5 meters from the St. Clair Avenue Street line and will be oriented in a south-easterly and south-westerly direction along St. Clair Avenue West. The Proposed Sign is further described in Attachment 1. Three variances to Chapter 694 are required to allow the Chief Building Official ("CBO") to issue the sign permit for the Proposed Sign. The requested variances are as below: 1. § 694-25C(2)(e) - The Proposed Sign is located approximately 27.8 meters from a Residential (R) Sign District, whereas third party electronic ground signs are not permitted to be erected within 60 meters of Residential Sign District. 2. § 694-25C(2)(f) - The Proposed Sign faces both a Residential and a Commercial Residential Sign District to the west of the Premises and faces a Residential, Commercial Residential and Open Space Sign District to the east of the Premises, whereas a third party electronic sign cannot face any premise with an R, RA, CR, I or OS sign district within 250 metres of the sign. 3. § 694-25C(2)(k) - The Proposed Sign faces have a V-shape configuration, whereas third party electronic signs are required to have a back to back configuration. Each of the three requested variances would be subject to the following four conditions: 1. In addition to the requirements of 694-18.E(5), the illumination of the Proposed Sign shall not exceed 150 nits during the period between sunset and sunrise. 2. The Proposed Sign shall contain sufficient physical barriers on the sign face to minimize, to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official acting reasonably, the visibility of the sign copy from the R Sign Districts to the north and north-west of the Proposed Sign located on Palestine Street, Batavia Avenue, and Mariposa Avenue. 3. The Proposed Sign's sign faces shall have an interior angle of not less than 45 degrees. 4. The Proposed Sign's sign faces shall be orientated in a south-westerly and south-easterly direction, so that the sign faces face approximately the direction of the travelled portion of St. Clair Avenue West. Following a review of the Applicant's submissions, the results of research and investigation by the staff of the Sign By-law Unit and feedback received from the local community, the CBO has determined that insufficient information has been established to determine that the proposal meets all nine of the criteria established in §694-30A of the Sign By-law. Specifically, there is insufficient information to establish that the Proposed Sign: is compatible with the development of the premises and surrounding area; will not alter the character of the premises and surrounding area and, is not contrary to the public interest. Therefore, the CBO does not support the Sign Variance Committee granting the three requested variances (each subject to four conditions) for the Proposed Sign.
The Sign Variance Committee: 1. Refused to grant the requested variances to sections 694-25C(2)(e), 694-25C(2)(f) and 694-25C(2)(k), each subject to the four specified conditions, as required, to allow for the issuance of a permit for the erection and display of one third party electronic ground sign at the property municipally known as 2568 St. Clair Avenue West, as described in Attachment 1 to this report (July 28, 2021) from the Manager, Sign By-Law Unit, Toronto Building.
Staff recommendation as filed
The Chief Building Official and Executive Director, Toronto Building, recommends that: 1. The Sign Variance Committee refuse to grant the requested variances to sections 694-25C(2)(e), 694-25C(2)(f) and 694-25C(2)(k), each subject to the four specified conditions, as required, to allow for the issuance of a permit for the erection and display of one third party electronic ground sign at the property municipally known as 2568 St. Clair Avenue West, as described in Attachment 1 to this report.