May 11, 1998

 To:Toronto Community Council

From:Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services

Subject:2265 Danforth Avenue, Application No. 998004: Request for approval of variances from Chapter 297, Signs, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code, upon application by Petro Canada c/o Wesley Robbins, 3275 Rebecca Street, Oakville, Ontario, L6L 6N5. (East Toronto)

Purpose:

To review and make recommendations respecting an application for variances to permit one illuminated ground sign and eight illuminated signs of varying types.

Financial Implications:

Not applicable.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

1. City Council approve Application No. 998004 respecting minor variances from Chapter 297, Signs, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code to permit one illuminated ground sign AA@.

2. City Council refuse Application No. 998004 respecting minor variances from Chapter 297, Signs, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code to permit eight illuminated signs AB@ AC@ and AD@.

3. The applicant be advised, upon partial approval of Application No. 998004, of the requirement to obtain the necessary permits from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services.

Comments:

The property is located on the south-east corner of Danforth Avenue and Patricia Drive, in a mixed-use (commercial/residential) district. The property accommodates an automotive service station. The applicant is requesting permission to install new identification signage in conjunction with the renovation of the existing service station (see Figure 1). The dimensions and characteristics of each sign are described in Table 1 attached. In addition to the nine signs that are part of this application there are ten signs, which are permitted under the Municipal Code, and which will be installed on the site.

The signs do not comply with Chapter 297 of the Municipal Code in the following ways:

1. Ground Sign AA@ will be set back 1.0 metre from the property line in lieu of the required 2.0 metres;

2. Fuel Centre Signs AB@ are not a sign type defined under the Municipal Code and therefore are not permitted; and

3. two southerly Fuel Centre Signs AB@, Co-Branded Fascia Signs AC@ on the west elevation and 24 hour Fascia Sign AD@ on the west elevation will be located within 20 metres of a lot in a residential district.

The first variance occurs because the sign would be located closer to the north property line than permitted. At its meeting of April 2, 1996, the former City of Toronto Council passed By-law No. 1996-0172 to increase the separation and setback requirements for ground and pedestal signs throughout the city. These regulations are aimed at ensuring that, where possible, commercial streetscapes and view corridors are preserved and enhanced and sight lines for motorists, cyclists and pedestrians are improved. In this instance, the sign would be installed within a curbed landscaped area and would not interfere with motorists or pedestrians entering or exiting the site.

The second variance is caused because the Fuel Centre Signs AB@ are not a sign type defined under the Municipal Code. The four signs would be suspended from the underside of the service canopy directly above the gas pumps. Each of these large, illuminated signs would display the same message being the Petro Canada logo and name.

The third variance relates to the proximity of six of the illuminated signs to a lot in a residential district. The Municipal Code requires signs to be set back at least 20 metres from a residentially zoned lot in order to reduce the impact of illumination on residential properties.

At its meeting dated January 21, 1998, Toronto Community Council requested that I report back on design guidelines of gas stations and gas bars within the context of the urban environment. The report is currently being undertaken by staff. In my opinion, approval of signs AB@ to AD@ would prejudice the results of the study currently being undertaken and could set an unfortunate precedent. For example, the large, illuminated Fuel Centre Signs AB@ which each carry the same message may, as a result of the study, become subject to number and size restrictions. Respecting sign types AC@ and AD@ I have advised the applicant of other options available to display this signage. For example, the signs could be re-located to the north part of the service building. However, the applicant remains unconvinced that the signs would be suitably visible. In my opinion it is unlikely, that changes to the current regulations respecting the proximity of illuminated signs to residential districts will be recommended as a result of the study now underway.

Given these reasons, I am recommending approval of one illuminated ground sign AA@ and refusal of eight illuminated signs AB@, AC@ and AD@.

Contact Name:Lora Mazzocca

Telephone: (416) 392-0421

Fax: (416) 392-7536

E-Mail: lmazzocc@city.toronto.on.ca

Beate Bowron

Director, Development Approval and Deputy Chief Building Official

 (p:\1998\ug\uds\pln\to981597.pln)-ms