Page 1 of Report PB-11-14

TO: Development and Infrastructure Committee

FROM: Planning and Building

SUBJECT: Application for a Variance to the Sign By-law to Permit Additional Ground Signs and a decreased distance between them, Daniel Johnson Architect Inc. - 1900 Appleby Line

Report Number: PB-11-14 Wards Affected: 5

File Numbers: 530-08/13

Date to Committee: January 13, 2014 Date to Council: January 27, 2014

Recommendation:

Approval of a variance to Sign By-law 34-2007 to permit additional ground signs and a decreased distance between them.

THAT Council, having considered the application by Daniel Johnson Architect Inc., 90 Richmond Street East – Unit 100, M5C 1P1, Toronto, Ontario, to allow the following variances to Sign By-law 34-2007 for the property known as 1900 Appleby Line:

1. A total number of all ground signs on any one property of 4 instead of the 2 ground signs permitted under the Sign By-law.

2. Ground signs on a property located closer than 45 metres to each other, whereas the Sign By-law requires a minimum distance of 45 metres between ground signs.

THAT Council, having had regard for Section 99, of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c.25 as amended, find the variance request to be minor; to be desirable; and maintaining the intent of the said By-law, hereby APPROVES the application subject to the following condition:

1. The variance applies to the proposed ground signage only and is valid only for the duration of its existing use on site.

File: 530-08-/13

Purpose:

Address other area of responsibility

Page 2 of Report PB-11-14

To recommend approval of the variance request to allow the installation of 2 proposed new ground signs at 1900 Appleby Line and allow the ground signs to be located less than 45 metres from each other.

Background:

Property Details

The subject property has the following characteristics:

• Located at the south-west corner of Appleby Line and Ironstone Drive (See Appendix A – Location / Zoning Sketch);

• Contains a multi-tenant retail plaza;

• Zoned “UE – Uptown Employment” under Zoning By-law 2020 (see Appendix A – Location / Zoning Sketch).

• Situated primarily in a mixed use area with commercial and residential lands uses.

Existing Signage

As outlined, the subject property contains a multi-tenant retail plaza; and therefore, there are a number of existing signs already installed on the subject property. Specifically, there are fifteen (15) wall signs and one (1) ground sign existing on the subject property for the various retail operations. In addition, the existing Starbucks operation has a number of existing signs including a projecting sign, a wall sign, two canopy signs and a number of directional signs relating to the existing drive-thru operation.

Discussion:

Application Details

The applicant wishes to install three (3) proposed new ground signs on the subject property. Each sign would consist of a Starbucks logo, a ‘drive-thru’ lettering sign and a directional arrow. The proposed signs are intended to direct on-site traffic towards the drive-thru of the Starbucks operation; however, the proposed signs are larger and higher than what Sign By-law 34-2007 permits for traffic directional signs. The applicant has indicated that the proposed signs will direct traffic more efficiently towards the Starbucks drive-thru lane and will improve visibility and traffic flow. The proposed signs would each measure approximately 1 square metre of sign face area (see Appendix B & C for sign location and details). The signs are proposed within the subject property, approximately 100 metres from Appleby Line (on the east side) and approximately 47 metres from Ironstone Drive (along the north side). Given the height, size and location

Page 3 of Report PB-11-14

of the proposed signs, the signs would only be visible from within the subject lands and would not be visible from the adjacent roadways.

Sign By-law 34-2007

Sign By-law 34-2007 contains various regulations pertaining to signage. The By-law sets out that a traffic directional sign shall not exceed an area of 0.55 square metres for a single sign face; shall not be higher than 1.5 metres above grade; and not more than 40% of each sign face shall be used to identify a business on the same property. The proposed signs exceed an area of 0.55 square metres per sign face area as they each would have a sign face area of approximately 1 square metre and would contain a logo that exceeds the maximum 40%. Further the proposed signs exceed the maximum permitted height of 1.5 metres for traffic directional signs as they are proposed to be 4.12 metres in height. While these signs are intended to be traffic directional signs, they clearly exceed the maximum provisions set out for traffic directional signs as outlined in By-law 34-2007, and therefore staff has classified these signs as ground signs. Notwithstanding, By-law 34-2007 sets out that no more than two ground signs shall be located on any property and the signs shall not be located any closer than 45m to each other. Currently, there is an existing ground sign along the frontage of Appleby Line and the applicant is proposing 3 additional ground signs, closer than 45m to each other, to direct traffic to the Starbucks drive-thru lane. As such, the applicant is requesting relief of the maximum number of ground signs on a property to permit 4 ground signs within 45m of each other.

Intent of Sign By-law Regulations

The Sign By-law regulates the type and design of signage to ensure that each property maintains an acceptable mix of signage; and that the signs are compatible with the signage for similar uses in the surrounding area. The Sign By-law also ensures that signage does not pose a negative visual impact on the existing streetscape and surrounding land uses, and that they not impact public safety. Traffic directional signs are intended to direct motor vehicle or pedestrian traffic within a site and be kept to a minimum size to avoid clutter and excessive advertising within a site.

Comments from Other Departments

Staff from the Engineering Department, Transportation Department as well as By-law Enforcement, were consulted on the application. No objections were received.

Staff Considerations

Staff is satisfied that the required variances are within the intent and purpose of the City’s Sign By-law. Staff views the variance as a relatively minor deviation from the By-law requirements.

In assessing requests for increases to the number of ground signs on a property and / or decreases in the required distance between ground signs, staff considers the overall impact that the additional signage will impose on the site, and to surrounding land uses.

Page 4 of Report PB-11-14

In some cases, additional signage is required to efficiently direct traffic as the orientation of buildings or site obstructions (i.e. trees, other buildings, vehicles, grade issues, etc.) may reduce visibility and way-finding within a site. In those cases, additional signage ensures that motorists are not forced to struggle with directions once within a site. Generally speaking, the provision for additional ground signs and / or decreased distance between ground signs is supported when it is considered necessary or desirable to maintain the viability of the site’s signage, as anticipated under the Sign By-law. Staff would typically object to an increase in the number of ground signs and / or decrease in the distance between signs where such is not deemed necessary for adequate identification or does not ensure public safety.

In this case, the proposed signs are not anticipated to appear out of character or scale on the site, given the large size of the property and the unique orientation of the buildings and the existing drive-thru lane. The location of the entrance to the drive-thru lane is such that it requires drivers to travel around the perimeter of the plaza to access a retail tenant (i.e. Starbucks), which is located along the perimeter of the plaza. As such, the location of the drive-thru lane may present a level of confusion for some drivers, which may impact the circulation of the site as well as pedestrian safety. To that extent, it is anticipated that the proposed signs would efficiently direct traffic around the perimeter of the site to the drive-thru lane.

The proposed sign areas and heights are deemed to be appropriate as the proposed increases would allow for quick identification and direction, thereby improving the flow of traffic through the site. In addition, the proposed signs would be located internal to the site and would not be visible from either Appleby Line or Ironstone Drive. To that extent, the proposed signage would not pose a negative visual impact to the existing streetscapes or surrounding properties. While the proposed signs would be located less than the minimum required 45 metres from each other (i.e. 32 metres), staff is of the opinion that the proposed distances are appropriate as the signage is proposed on existing light poles, thereby reducing clutter within the site by utilizing existing infrastructure. Further, the intent of the minimum distance between ground signs is to ensure that a streetscape is not overwhelmed with signage, and since the proposed signs would be interior to the site, the intent of the minimum distance provision in the Sign By-law is maintained. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed signs would improve traffic flow within the site without creating a negative visual impact to the existing streetscapes, the subject property or surrounding properties.

Financial Matters:

The application has been processed under the standard fee for sign variances in accordance with the 2013 Development Application Fee schedule.

Environmental Matters:

There are no environmental matters arising from the recommendation of this report.

Page 5 of Report PB-11-14

Conclusion:

Staff, having had regard for Section 99, of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c.25, is of the opinion that the proposed sign variances are minor, desirable and within the general intent of Sign By-law 34-2007 and recommend the application be approved subject to the proposed condition of the Recommendation.

Respectfully submitted,

Kyle Plas, MCIP, RPP

Planner II

335 7600 ext. 7555

Appendices:

a. Sketch No. 1 – Location / Zoning Sketch

b. Sketch No. 2 – Detail Sketch

c. Sketch No. 3 – Elevation Plans

Notifications: (after Council decision)

Approved by:

Bruce Krushelnicki, Director of Planning and Building Jeff Fielding, City Manager Mike Spicer, Director of Transit

Reviewed by:

Name:

Karina Olivares

Mailing or E-mail Address:

90 Richmond Street East – Suite 100, Toronto, ON MSC 1P1

Page 6 of Report PB-11-14

Appendix A – Location / Zoning Sketch

Page 7 of Report PB-11-14

Appendix B – Detail Sketch

Page 8 of Report PB-11-14

Appendix C – Elevation Sketch

Page 9 of Report PB-11-14