Sign Variance Committee
The full agenda, as filed
All 3 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.
SB20.1adopted
Permit World (the "Applicant") has applied for four variances required to allow the Chief Building Official ("CBO") to issue a sign permit to erect and display a double-faced third party electronic ground sign, displaying electronic static copy (the "Proposed Sign"), on the premises municipally known as 1601 Eglinton Avenue East, in Ward 16 - Don Valley East (the "Subject Premises"). The Subject Premises is designated as Utility ("U") sign district, which generally allows for third party electronic ground signs. However, is it also situated within an area subject to a site-specific area restriction under which City Council specifically determined that no third party sign shall be erected or displayed. The Proposed Sign would have a maximum height of 19.49 metres and would contain two rectangular sign faces displayed in a back-to-back configuration, each measuring 7.62 metres by 2.62 metres, with sign face area of 19.96 square metres. The Proposed Sign is described further in Attachment 1. Following a review of the Applicant's submissions and additional City staff research, the CBO has determined that there is not a sufficient basis to conclude that the eight required criteria in §694-30A of the Sign By-law have been established with respect to the four variances, each subject to one condition, as described further in Attachment 1 to this report.
The Sign Variance Committee: 1. Refused to grant the requested variances to sections 694-24.A(5), 694-25.D(3(b), 694-25.D(3(e) and 694-25.D(3)(f), each subject to one condition, as required to allow for the issuance of a permit for the erection and display of the Proposed Sign, as further described in Attachment 1 to the report (January 15, 2026) from the Project Director, Business Transformation and Citywide Priorities, 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 694-24.A(5), 694-25.D(3(b), 694-25.D(3(e) and 694-25.D(3)(f), each subject to one condition, as required to allow for the issuance of a permit for the erection and display of the Proposed Sign, as further described in Attachment 1.
SB20.2amended
This report concerns an appeal of the decision of the Chief Building Official and Executive Director, Toronto Building ("CBO") respecting an application for a Sign Variance (the "Proposed Sign Variance"). Kramer Design Associated Limited (the "Applicant") stated they were authorized by GWL Realty Advisors. (the "Owner") to apply for the Proposed Sign Variance, described in Attachment 1. The Proposed Sign Variance pertains to one variance sought for one first party electronic wall sign (the "Proposed Sign") intended to offer identification and information for on-site services and tenants located on property municipally known as 33 Yonge Street (the "Subject Premises"). After conducting a review and public consultation in accordance with the requirements of the Sign By-law, the CBO made a decision to refuse to grant the requested variance on the basis that the Proposed Sign Variance did not meet all of the mandatory criteria. After the issuance of the CBO's decision refusing to grant the variance requested for the Proposed Sign Variance, the Applicant filed an appeal of the CBO's decision. As a result of the Applicant filing the appeal, the Sign Variance Committee ("SVC") is now required to conduct an appeal de novo, meaning that the SVC shall determine whether the Applicant has demonstrated that the Proposed Sign Variance meets all eight criteria, on the basis of the information presented to the SVC. The SVC may make a decision to refuse or grant the variance requested by the Applicant for the Proposed Sign Variance, or to make a decision to grant different variances, or impose conditions which the Applicant did not include in the Proposed Sign Variance.
The Sign Variance Committee: 1. Granted the variance to section 694-15.A as required to allow for the issuance of a permit respecting the erection and display of the Proposed Sign contained in the Proposed Sign Variance, as further described in Attachment 1 to the report (January 23, 2026) from the Project Director, Business Transformation and Citywide Priorities, 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 variance to section 694-15.A as required to allow for the issuance of a permit respecting the erection and display of the Proposed Sign contained in the Proposed Sign Variance, as further described in Attachment 1 to this report.
SB20.3adopted
This report concerns an appeal of the decision of the Chief Building Official and Executive Director, Toronto Building ("CBO") respecting an application for a Signage Master Plan (the "Proposed SMP") at the premises municipally known as 335 Yonge Street. Architect Osama Abo Nassar (the "Applicant") stated they were authorized by 2160943 Ontario LTD (the "Owner") to apply for the Proposed SMP described in Attachment 1. The Proposed SMP pertains to one variance sought for the erection and display of 27 first party wall signs (the "Proposed Signs") intended to offer identification for the businesses on the Subject Premises. Variance is sought for 18 of the Proposed Signs contained in the Proposed SMP. After conducting a review and public consultation in accordance with the requirements of the Sign By-law, the CBO made a decision to grant the requested variances on the basis that the Proposed SMP, in the opinion of the CBO, met all of the mandatory criteria in §694-30A. After the issuance of the CBO's decision, one of the parties to the hearing, J Ken Rutherford (the "Appellant") filed an appeal of the CBO's decision. As a result of the Appellant filing the appeal, the Sign Variance Committee (the "SVC") is now conducting an appeal de novo, meaning that the SVC are required to conduct an evaluation to determine whether the Applicant has demonstrated that the Proposed SMP meets all eight criteria, on the basis of the information presented to the SVC. The SVC may make a decision to refuse, or grant the variances requested by the Applicant for the Proposed SMP, or to make a decision to grant different variances, or impose conditions which the Applicant did not include in the Proposed SMP.
The Sign Variance Committee: 1. Granted the requested variance to Subsection 3E(5) of Schedule C, Additional Special Sign District Regulations, to Chapter 694, Signs, General, required for the implementation of the Proposed Signage Master Plan on the premises municipally known as 335 Yonge Street, as detailed in Attachment 1 of the report (January 23, 2026) from the Project Director, Business Transformation and Citywide Priorities, Toronto Building.
Staff recommendation as filed
The Chief Building Official and Executive Director, Toronto Building, recommends that: 1. The Sign Variance Committee grant the requested variance to Subsection 3E(5) of Schedule C, Additional Special Sign District Regulations, to Chapter 694, Signs, General, required for the implementation of the Proposed Signage Master Plan on the premises municipally known as 335 Yonge Street, as detailed in Attachment 1 of this report.