Variances from Chapter 297 - Signs,
of the Former City of Toronto Municipal Code -
(Midtown, East Toronto, North Toronto, Downtown, High Park)
The Toronto Community Council recommends the adoption of the following reports
from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services:
(September 4, 1998)
Purpose:
To review and make recommendations respecting an application for variances to permit
signage on each elevation of the historically designated building at 888 Yonge Street for
identification purposes.
Financial Implications:
Not applicable.
Recommendations:
(1)That City Council approve Application No. 998070 respecting minor variances from
Chapter 297, Signs, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code to permit seven
illuminated non-encroaching fascia signs and two illuminated encroaching fascia signs.
(2)That the applicant be advised, upon approval of Application No. 998070, of the
requirement to obtain the necessary permits from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and
Development Services.
Comments:
The property is located on the north-west corner of Yonge Street and Davenport Road, in a
mixed use (Commercial-Residential) district. The property accommodates a historically
designated building. The applicant is requesting permission to erect nine signs for
identification purposes. The proposed signs are illustrated on the attached Figures 1- 5.
West Elevation:
The two proposed illuminated, non encroaching signs on the west elevation do not comply
with Chapter 297 of the Municipal Code in the following way:
1.The illuminated "Comedy Network" logo fascia signs, will not be located 20 metres from
a lot in a "G" (park) district, as required.
This provision, respecting minimum separation distance, is intended to reduce the impact of
illuminated signs adjacent to parks. Both signs face west and though visible from the small
parkette, they are not directed towards the park users. While the separation distance between
the signs and the "G' (park) district is less than 20 metres, the actual distance between the
signs and the park is greater than 20 metres. Therefore, the signs in question will not have an
adverse impact on the users of this parkette.
North Elevation:
The proposed illuminated, non encroaching sign on the north elevation does not comply
with Chapter 297 of the Municipal Code in the following way:
1.The 34.8 m² illuminated fascia sign will exceed the maximum permitted 25 m² sign area
by 9.8 m².
The variance relates to the size of the sign on the building. This provision restricts the size
of signs in order to minimize their impact on the streetscape and on the buildings to which
they are attached. The sign would be installed along a blank portion of the side wall between
the second and third storeys. In this instance, the uses in the immediate vicinity are
commercial in nature. In my opinion, the sign's excess size will not negatively impact the
building, streetscape or adjacent uses.
Southeast Corner: (first storey)
The proposed illuminated, encroaching sign on the southeast corner does not comply with
Chapter 297 of the Municipal Code in the following ways:
1. The 14.6 m² illuminated encroaching sign will exceed the 30 % maximum required area
of the building face of the first storey commercial unit.
2.The vertical minimum clearance between the public sidewalk and the lowest point of sign
would be 0.9 metre instead of 2.5 metres as required by the Municipal Code.
3.The sign will be located less than 20 metres from a lot in a G (park) district.
The size and vertical clearance of signs are regulated in order to reduce the visual impact of
signs on the streetscape and on the buildings to which they are attached and to ensure that
pedestrian safety is maintained. In this case the sign has been sized and positioned to fit into
the architectural recess at the corner of the building and it would project less than two inches
beyond the property line. The applicant has been advised that this projection will have to be
further reduced in order to satisfy the Ontario Building Code. It is my opinion that the sign
will not create an unsafe condition for pedestrians.
Although visible from the parkette, the sign is directed towards motorists and pedestrians on
Yonge Street and while the separation distance, between the sign and the "G' (park) district,
is not 20 metres, the distance between the sign and the park is more than 20 metres. The sign
should not negatively impact the park.
Southeast Corner: (above second storey)
The proposed illuminated, encroaching sign on the southeast corner does not comply with
Chapter 297 of the Municipal Code in the following ways:
1.The variance occurs because the sign will be erected above the second storey more than
10 metre above grade.
2.The sign will be located less than 20 metres from a lot in a G (park) district.
Signs are permitted to be located only within the first two storeys of a building. This
provision restricts signs to their traditional locations in order to minimize the impact of
signage on the building, on the streetscape and on upper floor residential units in the
immediate vicinity. In this instance, there is no residential unit in the immediate vicinity and
the sign consists of three modestly sized (1.8 m x 1.8 m) individual letters. The sign has
been sized and positioned to complement the proportions of this narrow, rounded and
recessed facade.
With respect to the minimum separation distance between illuminated signs and park, I
would advise that the sign is directed towards Yonge Street motorists and pedestrians. Also,
while the separation distance between the sign and the "G" (park) district is less than 20
metres, the distance between the sign and the park is more than 20 metres.
South Elevation:
The four proposed illuminated, non-encroaching fascia signs on the south elevation do not
comply with Chapter 297 of the Municipal Code in the following way:
1.The signs will obstruct and interfere with windows of the building.
2. The signs will be located within 20 metres from a lot in a "G" (park) district.
The four illuminated signs on the south elevation of the building do not comply with
provisions of Sign By-law 1994-0337 as they obstruct windows. However, the windows in
question have been blocked by the previous owner to reduce sound transmission from the
former concert hall and the new owner intends to use this premises for taping live comedy
shows. Therefore, I have no concern with the blocked windows being covered by signage.
Again, while the separation distance between the signs and the "G' (park) district is less than
20 metres, the actual physical distance between the signs and the park is in excess of the
required 20 metres separation distance.
Staff of the Heritage Toronto have reviewed the plans and have advised that they have no
concerns.
I am recommending approval of this application, as I consider the requested variances to be
minor and within the general intent and purpose of the sign provisions of the Municipal
Code.
Contact Name:
Norm Girdhar
Telephone: (416) 392-7209
Fax: (416) 392-7536
E-Mail: ngirdhar@city.toronto.on.ca
(August 27, 1998)
Purpose:
To review and make recommendations respecting an application for variances to install
three
non-illuminated ground signs for the purpose of advertising the sale of new residential units
within "Woodbine Park Community" at 1669 Queen Street East.
Financial Implications:
Not applicable.
Recommendations:
(1)That City Council approve Application No. 998063, respecting minor variances from
Chapter 297, Signs, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code to permit three
non-illuminated ground signs at 1669 Queen Street East, on condition that the signs be
permitted only for a period of 12 months from the date of City Council approval.
(2)That the applicant be advised, upon approval of Application No. 998063, of the
requirement to obtain the necessary permits from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and
Development Services.
Comments:
The 33 hectare property is the site of the former Greenwood Racetrack, bounded by Queen
Street East, Woodbine Avenue and Lakeshore Boulevard East, and is zoned residential. The
applicant is requesting permission to install signage in order to market residential properties
which have been approved for this site (see Figure 1).
Ground signs 1 and 2 have a length of 3.7 metres and a height of 2.4 metres, with an area of
8.9 m² and sign 3 has a length of 7.2 metres and a height of 4.9 metres, with an area of 35.3
m² (see Figure 2).
The signs do not comply with Chapter 297 of the Municipal Code in the following ways:
1.the area of a sign is not permitted to be more than 1 m². The proposed ground signs 1 and
2, each will have an area of 8.9 m², while ground sign 3 will have an area of 35.3 m²; and
2.the height of a sign is not permitted to be more than 2.0 metres. The proposed ground
signs 1 and 2, each will have a height of 3.7 metres, and ground sign 3 will have a height of
6.1 metres.
The variances occur because the land is zoned residential. Signs in residential districts are
required to be small and low in order to limit any negative impact on the streetscape and on
neighbouring residential uses. The proposed signs are much larger and higher than permitted
by the Municipal Code. However, given that the non-illuminated signs will be temporary
and will be erected at least 30 metres away from the closest residential property, there will
not, in my opinion, be any adverse impacts.
I am recommending that this application be approved, with a condition respecting the length
of the approval period, as I consider the proposed variances to be acceptable in this
circumstance. The applicant is in agreement with this recommendation.
Contact Name:
Norm Girdhar
Telephone: (416) 392-7209
Fax: (416) 392-7536
E-Mail: ngirdhar@city.toronto.on.ca
(August 13, 1998)
Purpose:
To review and make recommendations respecting an application for variances to permit one
illuminated ground sign for identification purposes at 125 Chatsworth Drive.
Financial Implications:
Not applicable.
Recommendation:
That City Council approve Application No. 998054 respecting minor variances from
Chapter 297, Signs, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code to permit one illuminated
ground sign at premises 125 Chatsworth Drive.
Comments:
The property is located on the south-west corner of Lawrence Avenue West and Chatsworth
Drive, in a residential district. The property accommodates Lawrence Park Collegiate
Institute. The applicant is requesting permission to erect one illuminated ground sign for
identification purposes (see Figure 1). The sign has a length of 1.6 metres and a height of
1.7 metres, with an area of 2.7 m².
The sign does not comply with Chapter 297 of the Municipal Code in the following ways:
1.the area of the proposed sign (2.7 m²) will exceed the maximum permitted area of 2.5 m²
by 0.2 m²; and
2.the proposed sign will not be erected between the front lot line and the main wall of the
building as required.
The first variance occurs because the sign will be 0.2 m² larger than permitted by the
Municipal Code. Signs in residential districts are required to be small and low in order to
limit any negative impact on the streetscape and on neighbouring residential uses. Given
that the closest residential property from which the sign would be visible would be
approximately 30 metres away and across Chatsworth Drive, the sign would not have an
adverse impact on the neighbouring residential uses.
Respecting the second variance, the Municipal Code requires that the sign be erected
between the front lot line and the main wall of the building. The school building is situated
on a corner lot and in this instance the sign would be located 2.0 metres inside the side lot
line, near the south-west corner of Lawrence Avenue West and Chatsworth Drive. It would
be directed toward motorists and pedestrians on both Lawrence Avenue West and
Chatsworth Drive. I do not feel that the proposed sign would have an adverse impact on the
surrounding neighbourhood.
I am recommending approval of this application, as I find the variances requested to be
minor and within the general intent and purpose of the sign provisions of the Municipal
Code.
Contact Name:
Norm Girdhar
Telephone: (416) 392-7209
Fax: (416) 392-7536
E-Mail: ngirdhar@city.toronto.on.ca
(August 13, 1998)
Purpose:
To review and make recommendations respecting an application for a variance to maintain
one illuminated projecting sign and permit one additional illuminated projecting sign at 12
Richmond Street East.
Financial Implications:
Not applicable.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(1)City Council approve Application No. 998031 respecting a minor variance from Chapter
297, Signs, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code to maintain one illuminated
projecting sign and permit one additional illuminated projecting sign.
(2)The applicant be advised, upon approval of Application No. 998031, of the requirement
to obtain the necessary permits from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development
Services.
Comments:
The property is located on the north side of Richmond Street East, between Yonge Street
and Victoria Street, in a mixed-use (commercial/residential) district. The property
accommodates a seven storey commercial building. The property is designated under Part
IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. The applicant is requesting permission to maintain one
illuminated projecting sign and install a second illuminated projecting sign on the south
elevation of the building within the tenant's commercial unit frontage (see Figure 1). The
signs each have a length of 1.4 metres and a height of 0.6 metres, with an area of 0.82 m².
The signs do not comply with Chapter 297 of the Municipal Code in that they will overhang
the sidewalk by 2.1 metres instead of the permitted 1.0 metre.
At its meeting of November 18, 1996, City Council approved a minor variance application
for this tenant to permit a sign which projected 1.52 metres instead of the permitted 1.0
metre. Since then, the applicant has installed a new sign that projects 0.58 metres beyond the
previously approved sign. The applicant has advised that the canopy on the building made it
difficult to see the previously approved sign. The applicant is proposing to mount a second
similar projecting sign on an existing pole west of the existing sign (see Figure 1).
A recent site visit by staff has confirmed that the canopies extend substantially over the
pedestrian sidewalk obscuring visibility of the signs from the street. In my opinion, the signs
are appropriately located in order to be visible from Yonge Street and Victoria Street.
Further, the signs are located approximately 3.0 metres above grade and their extent of
projection will not endanger nor inconvenience pedestrians.
Heritage Toronto has advised that they have no objections to this application.
Given these reasons, I am recommending approval of this application.
Contact Name:
Lora Mazzocca
Telephone: (416) 392-0421
Fax: (416) 392-7536
E-Mail: lmazzocc@city.toronto.on.ca
(August 31, 1998)
Purpose:
To review and make recommendations respecting an application for variances to permit a
second illuminated ground sign on the Bay Street frontage for identification purposes at 825
Bay Street.
Financial Implications:
Not applicable.
Recommendations:
(1)That City Council approve Application No. 998055 respecting minor variances from
Chapter 297, Signs, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code to permit one illuminated
ground sign on condition that :
-the sign be illuminated only between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m. and that this be
achieved by means of an automatic device; and
-all existing non-conforming signs posted on the light standards are removed prior to the
issuance of the necessary permit(s) for the illuminated ground sign.
(2)That the applicant be advised, upon approval of Application No. 998055, of the
requirement to obtain the necessary permit(s) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning
and Development Services.
Comments:
The property is located north of College Street on the east side of Bay Street, and it consists
of the entire block between Grosvenor Street and Grenville Street, in a CR district. The
property accommodates Addison on Bay, an auto dealership. The applicant is requesting
permission to erect a second illuminated ground sign for identification purposes (see Figure
1). The sign has a length of 2.7 metres and a height of 5.9 metres, with an area of 7.0 m².
The sign does not comply with Chapter 297 of the Municipal Code in the following way:
1.only one ground sign for the purpose of identification is permitted within any frontage of
a property.
The number of signs permitted within a single frontage is regulated so as to prevent sign
clutter. In this instance, however, the lot frontage is a block long and is able, in my opinion,
to accommodate a second ground sign without there being a negative impact on the
streetscape. Further, the owner has agreed that as a condition of approval he will remove all
existing non-conforming signs posted on the light standards. Given that the closest
residential unit from which the sign would be visible would be approximately 30 metres
away and at the 3rd floor level, there should not be any adverse impact on the surrounding
neighbourhood. However, to ensure this, I have required that the hours of illumination be
restricted to between 7:00 a.m and 11:00 p.m.
I am recommending that this application be approved, with conditions respecting the
removal of certain existing signs and the restriction of hours of illumination, as I consider
the proposed variance to be acceptable in this circumstance. The owner is in agreement with
this recommendation.
Contact Name:
Norm Girdhar
Telephone: (416) 392-7209
Fax: (416) 392-7536
E-Mail: ngirdhar@city.toronto.on.ca
(August 31, 1998)
Purpose:
To review and make recommendations respecting an application for variances to permit one
encroaching illuminated projecting sign for identification purposes at 347 Jane Street.
Financial Implications:
Not applicable.
Recommendations:
(1)That City Council approve Application No. 998057 respecting minor variances from
Chapter 297, Signs, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code to permit one
encroaching illuminated projecting sign at 347 Jane Street.
(2)That the applicant be advised, upon approval of Application No. 998057, of the
requirement to obtain the necessary permits from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and
Development Services.
Comments:
The property is located on east side of Jane Street, north of Bloor Street West and south of
Annette Street, in a mixed use district. The two storey building accommodates a Scotia
Bank Branch on the first floor and a Billiard Hall (Baby Point Lounge) on the second floor.
The applicant is requesting permission to erect one encroaching illuminated projecting sign
for identification purposes (see Figure 1). The sign has a length of 1.0 metre and a height of
1.0 metre, with an area of 1.0 m².
The sign does not comply with Chapter 297 of the Municipal Code in the following ways:
1.the sign will overhang the public sidewalk by 1.2 metres instead of the permitted 1.0
metre.
The variance results from the extent of the sign's projection from the building face. The sign
would overhang 0.2 metres more than permitted by the Municipal Code. In this instance,
however, the sign is in keeping with other signs along this segment of Jane Street and its
extent of projection will not endanger nor inconvenience pedestrians.
I am recommending approval of this application, as I find the variance requested to be minor
and within the general intent and purpose of the sign provisions of the Municipal Code.
Contact Name:
Norm Girdhar
Telephone: (416) 392-7209
Fax: (416) 392-7536
E-Mail: ngirdhar@city.toronto.on.ca
Details
(September 1, 1998)
Purpose:
To review and make recommendations respecting an application for variances to permit one
illuminated ground sign, four illuminated "outrigger" signs and two non-illuminated
pedestal signs at 1800 Bayview Avenue.
Financial Implications:
Not applicable.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(1)City Council approve Application No. 998046 respecting minor variances from Chapter
297, Signs, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code to permit one illuminated ground
sign, four illuminated "outrigger" signs and two non-illuminated pedestal signs.
(2)The applicant be advised, upon approval of Application No. 998046, 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-west corner of Bayview Avenue and Roehampton
Avenue, in a mixed-use (commercial/residential) district. The property accommodates an
automotive service station. The applicant is requesting permission to install one illuminated
ground sign, four illuminated "outrigger" signs and two non-illuminated pedestal signs in
conjunction with the renovation of an existing gas station (see Figure 1). The signs have
dimensions as follows:
Ground sign "A", has a length of 1.9 metres and a height of 6.0 metres, with an area of
11.4m²;
Outrigger signs "B", each have a length of 1.6 metres and a height of 0.5 metres, with an
area of 0.8 m²; and Pedestal signs "C", each have a length of 0.7 metres and a height of 1.0
metres, with an area of 0.7 m².
The signs do not comply with Chapter 297 of the Municipal Code in the following ways:
1.the ground sign will not be set back a minimum distance of 2.0 metres from the streetline
and 6.0 metres from the point of intersection of two streetlines;
2.the "outrigger" signs are not defined under the Municipal Code and are therefore not
permitted; and
3.more than one pedestal sign will be erected within both frontages of the lot.
The first variance occurs because the sign would be set back 1.5 metres from the east
property line instead of 2.0 metres. 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 applicant proposes to remove the existing ground sign and install a new ground
sign in the same location within a curbed landscaped area using the existing concrete base.
The sign cannot be set back any further because of existing underground utilities and its
slightly reduced setback would not interfere with motorists or pedestrians entering or
existing the site.
The second variance is caused because the outrigger signs are not a sign type defined under
the Municipal Code. The signs would be suspended 0.9 metres below the underside of the
service canopy and would be oriented north/south parallel to the pump island. These signs
are small in size and illumination from these signs would be minimal. Further, the closest
residential dwelling is located approximately 50 metres away and across Roehampton
Avenue. In my opinion, the signs are necessary for vehicles manoeuvring within the gas
pump area.
The third variance occurs because leader boards would be installed on either end of the gas
pumps totalling two pedestal signs per frontage. The leader boards are used to identify the
type of fuel being sold at the pump and are non-illuminated and low in height which I
consider acceptable.
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. In this instance, the signs are necessary and in my opinion, their approval will
not prejudice the results of the study currently being undertaken by staff.
I am recommending approval of this application, as I find the variances requested to be
minor and within the general intent and purpose of the sign provisions of the Municipal
Code.
Contact Name:
Lora Mazzocca
Telephone: (416) 392-0421
Fax: (416) 392-7536
E-Mail: lmazzocc@city.toronto.on.ca
(September 3, 1998)
Purpose:
To review and make recommendations respecting an application for a variance to maintain
six fascia signs at 912 Mount Pleasant Road.
Financial Implications:
Not applicable.
Recommendations:
It is recommended that:
(1)City Council approve Application No. 998030 respecting a minor variance from Chapter
297, Signs, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code to maintain one non-illuminated
fascia sign and five illuminated signs on condition that the signs be illuminated only
between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. and that this be controlled by means of an
automatic timing device.
(2)The applicant be advised, upon approval of Application No. 998030, of the requirement
to obtain the necessary permits from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development
Services.
Comments:
The property is located on the west side of Mount Pleasant Road, between Erskine Avenue
and Broadway Avenue, in a residential (R4A) district. The property accommodates a two
storey commercial building. The applicant is requesting permission to maintain four
illuminated fascia signs on the east elevation of the building and one illuminated fascia sign
and one non-illuminated fascia sign on the south elevation of the building (see Figures 1 and
2).
The signs do not comply with Chapter 297 of the Municipal Code in that they are not
permitted in this residential district.
The Municipal Code permits illuminated signs in residential districts in conjunction with
uses that are normally permitted in this district. Car dealerships are not permitted and hence
the variance. The applicant has advised that the car dealership use has existed in this
location for approximately 20 years and therefore the use is legal non-conforming. The new
signs have been installed in conjunction with exterior renovations that were approved as part
of a Committee of Adjustment application in 1997.
Five of the six existing signs consist of channel letters mounted horizontally across the
building face. The applicant has advised that the channel letters are halo-lit rather than front
lit in order to minimize the impact of illumination. However, to ensure that there is no
negative impact I am recommending that the signs be illuminated only between the hours of
7:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. and that this be controlled by means of an automatic timing device.
Given that the closest residential use is located approximately 30 metres away and across
Mount Pleasant Road this control on illumination should suffice.
I am recommending approval of this application with controls on the hours of illumination.
The applicant concurs with this recommendation.
Contact Name:
Lora Mazzocca
Telephone: (416) 392-0421
Fax: (416) 392-7536
E-Mail: lmazzocc@city.toronto.on.ca
