Variances from Chapter 297, Signs,

of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code -

57 Spadina Avenue (Downtown)

The Toronto Community Council recommends that City Council approve Application No.998092 respecting a minor variance from Chapter 297, Signs, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code to permit one illuminated roof sign at 57 Spadina Avenue.

The Toronto Community Council reports, for the information of Council, having requested the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services to report to the Urban Environment and Development Committee and the Toronto Community Council, on harmonized fees for sign applications in the whole city, including the possibility of introducing a licensing system similar to that existing in the former City of Scarborough.

The Toronto Community Council submits the following report (November 25, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services:

Purpose:

To review and make recommendations respecting an application for a variance to permit one illuminated roof sign at 57 Spadina Avenue.

Source of Funds:

Not applicable.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that:

City Council refuse Application No. 998092 respecting a minor variance from Chapter 297, Signs, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code to permit one illuminated roof sign.

Comments:

The property is located on the south-east corner of Spadina Avenue and King Street West, in a reinvestment area (RA) district. The property accommodates a two storey commercial building. The applicant is requesting permission to remove an existing illuminated third party roof sign and install a new illuminated third party roof sign in the same location (see Figure 3). The sign has a length of 14.6 metres and a height of 4.3 metres, with an area of 63 m².

The sign does not comply with Chapter 297 of the Municipal Code in that roof signs are not permitted in RA districts. The sign provisions in RA districts are similar to those in CR and MCR districts given the wide variety of uses permitted in this district. The former City of Toronto Council adopted this prohibition on April 24, 1995 based on a study of roof signs along main streets in CR and MCR districts. The rationale for prohibiting roof signs in RA, CR and MCR districts is that roof signs detract from the streetscape, and impact both the skyline views along our commercial streets and the views from adjacent residential districts.

Signs which were legally erected prior to the passing of the by-law and which do not conform to the current sign provisions of the Municipal Code are permitted to remain as legal non-conforming. At its meeting of April 1 and 2, 1996, the former City of Toronto Council adopted By-law 1996-0168 which further amended the sign regulations of Chapter 297 of the Municipal Code by deleting the replacement provisions for legal non-conforming signs. City Council adopted this recommendation because it was felt that the continued replacement of non-conforming signs would serve to prolong the presence of signs in areas where Council had decided that they are no longer desired and by permitting the erection of new non-conforming signs, the goal of attrition would take much longer to achieve. While the signs' faces and attributes can be changed, no changes are permitted to the sign structure, location or height of legal non-conforming signs.

In this instance, the applicant proposes to remove an existing roof sign and install a new roof sign of the same size in approximately the same location as the existing roof sign. The sign would consist of two illuminated sign panels oriented north-south and would be supported by six metal posts anchored to the roof of the building. The sign would be visible to residential uses immediately south of the site approximately 40 metres away, as well as to visitors to Clarence Square Park.

Since the prohibition of roof signs in 1995, I have consistently recommended refusal of traditional roof signs. I have only recommended approval of roof signs in a few instances, where the classification of "roof sign" was arguably a technical matter resulting from the sign being located partially above the roof level or when it was located fully above the roof level but integrated into the architecture of the building.

The current application proposes a traditional roof sign which will project 7.7 metres above the building roof line. In my opinion, a new roof sign at this location would contradict the intent of the Sign By-law. It would also set an unfortunate precedent for other properties in this area and on all of the main streets in the former City of Toronto.

Given the prohibition of roof signs in this district and the deletion of the replacement provisions for legal non-conforming signs, I consider the requested variance to be significant and not within the general intent and purpose of the sign provisions of the Municipal Code. I am, therefore, recommending refusal of this application.

Contact Name:

Lora Mazzocca

Telephone: (416) 392-0421

Fax: (416) 392-7536

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

--------

Mr. Danny Starnino, Cieslok Outdoor Ltd., appeared before the Toronto Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter.

Insert Table/Map No. 1

57 Spadina Avenue

Insert Table/Map No. 2

57 Spadina Avenue

Insert Table/Map No. 3

57 Spadina Avenue

Insert Table/Map No. 4

57 Spadina Avenue