DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE
	TO:	Mayor and Members of Council
	FROM:	Jim Baird, Commisioner of Devlopment Services John Wright, Director of Building Standards
	PREPARED BY:	Elvio Valente, Zoning Supervisor
	DATE OF MEETING:	June 3, 2003
	SUBJECT:	Ground Sign Variance Longo Brothers Fruit Market 3085 Highway #7, East Application # 03-108598

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT the ground sign variance application by Longo Brothers Fruit Market at 3085 Highway #7 East, application # 03-108598, BE DENIED

BACKGROUND:

The subject property is zoned SC1 (Special Commercial One) under By-law 165-80, as amended, which is located on the south side of Highway #7 east of Woodbine Avenue.(Figure 2)

In February of 2002, Maxximum Media showed staff a proposal for a 16.25m² ground sign which included a readograph. It was the same as what is being proposed under the current application.

The maximum area permitted under the sign by-law, at the time, was 6m² per face. The applicant was advised of that and was asked to reduce the sign to 6m² or he could wait to see what would be coming out of the sign by-law study. He was told that 10m² was being recommended for the maximum area for this type of development in the proposed by-law.

Staff also informed the applicant that we would not recommend any increases in sign area through a sign variance when the new by-law came into effect because the maximum area would be increased by 66.6% under the new by-law.

The applicant then made an application in March 2002. They removed the readograph from the drawings and submitted a sign that would comply with the proposed 10m² under the new by-law. The applicant told staff to leave the application as is and wait for the passing of the new sign by-law.

The by-law was passed in May of 2002 and the applicant was issued a permit that complied with the 10m² and did not include the readograph.

The sign company then proceeded to erect the 16.25m² sign that they originally had shown Town staff, back in February of 2002, which included the readograph. (Figure 4). The readograph was removed after By-law enforcement advised them that they did not receive a permit to erect the readograph.

On January 30 of 2003, the applicant applied for a sign permit and a sign variance to request approval for the addition of the readograph to the existing ground sign.

The applicant submitted a letter as part of their variance application outlining their reasons for requesting the sign variance. (Figure 6).

The following chart illustrates the variance requested.

By-law Provision	Permitted under By-law	Proposed	Percentage increase
Maximum ground sign area per face (including readograph)	10 m²	16.25m²	62.5%

OPTIONS/DISCUSSION:

Under the current sign By-law passed in May of 2002, no variances have been approved.

Section 19.5 of the sign by-law states that in considering an application for a variance the Development Services Committee and Council shall have regard for:

(a) Special circumstances or conditions applying to the land, building or use referred to in the application:

It is the opinion of staff that there are no special conditions or circumstances present on this site. The building is located on a major highway and is very visible with no visual impairments to it.

(b) Whether strict application of the provisions of this By-law in the context of the special circumstances applying to the land, building or use, would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary and unusual hardship for the applicant, inconsistent with the general intent and purpose of this By-law:

Reducing the size of the existing sign to accommodate the readograph within the maximum of 10m² would not create any unusual hardship for the site. Longo’s has sufficient wall signage that would still provide high visibility for the passer by if Longo’s was to include the readograph in the maximum 10m².

(c) Whether such special circumstances or conditions are pre-existing and not created by the owner or applicant:

There are no special circumstances. The section is not applicable.

(d) Whether the sign that is the subject of the variance will alter the essential character of the area:

If approved, the proposed addition to the existing sign would alter the character of the Highway #7 streetscape. Allowing a 6m² readograph to an existing sign, already at the 10m² maximum, would set a precedent for other existing signs and encourage additional variances for readographs throughout the Town.

Therefore the Building Department recommends that the ground sign variance be denied.

INTER DEPARTMENTAL IMPLICATIONS:

The By-law Enforcement and Licensing Department is responsible for the inspection and enforcement of the Sign By-law.

ATTACHMENTS:

Figure 1 – Applicant

Figure 2 – Site Location

Figure 3 – Proposed Ground Sign

Figure 4 – Photograph of illegal sign with readograph

Figure 5 – Photograph of existing complying sign

Figure 6 – Letter from applicant

John Wright, Director of Building Standards Services

Jim Baird, Commissioner of Development Services

Q:\Building\Data\Signvari\3085hwy7

FIGURE 1 - Applicant

Tara Garnet

50 Viceroy Road

Concord, On

L4K 3A7

FIGURE 2 – Site Location

FIGURE 3 – Proposed Ground Sign

FIGURE 4 – Photograph of illegal sign with readograph

FIGURE 5 – Photograph of existing complying sign

FIGURE 6 – Letter from applicant

FIGURE 6 – continued …