1. SIGNS BY-LAW
AMENDMENT - 400 WEST HUNT CLUB ROAD MODIFICATION AU RÈGLEMENT MUNICIPAL SUR LES ENSEIGNES –
400, CHEMIN HUNT CLUB OUEST |
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION AS AMENDED
That Council approve the application to amend
the Signs By-law of the former City of Nepean to permit a roof sign and
animation of a roof sign at 400 West Hunt Club
Road.
RECOMMANDATION MODIFIÉE DU COMITÉ
Que le Conseil municipal approuve
la demande de modification au Règlement municipal sur les enseignes de
l’ancienne Ville de Nepean en vue de permettre l’installation d’une enseigne et
d’une enseigne lumineuse animée sur le toit du 400, chemin West Hunt Club.
Documentation
1. Development Services Department General
Manager’s report dated 9 December 2003 (ACS2004-DEV-BLD-0001).
2.
Extract of Draft
Minutes, 27 January 2004.
Report to/Rapport
au :
Planning
and Environment Committee
Comité de l'urbanisme et de l’environnement
and Council / et au Conseil
9 December 2003 / le 9 decembre
2003
Submitted by/Soumis par : Ned Lathrop, General
Manager/Directeur général,
Development Services/Services d'aménagement
Contact Person/Personne ressource : Sandra Garnett,
Manager / Gestionnaire
Legal and Services Integration / Insertion juridique et des services
(613) 580-2424 x41544, sandra.garnett@ottawa.ca
|
SUBJECT: |
|
|
|
|
|
OBJET
: |
MODIFICATION AU RÈGLEMENT
MUNICIPAL SUR LES ENSEIGNES - 400, CHEMIN HUNT CLUB OUEST |
REPORT
RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning and
Environment Committee recommend Council refuse the application to amend the
Signs By-law of the former City of Nepean to permit a roof sign and animation
of a roof sign.
RECOMMANDATION DU RAPPORT
Que le Comité de
l'urbanisme et de l'environnement recommande au Conseil municipal de refuser la
demande de modification au règlement municipal sur les enseignes de l'ancienne
Ville de Nepean en vue de permettre l'installation d'une enseigne lanternon
animée.
BACKGROUND
The applicant, on behalf of
the property owner/occupant Star Mercedes Benz, is requesting an amendment to
Section 3.4 of Signs By-law 002-99 of the former City of Nepean to permit the
installation of an illuminated rotating sign mounted on the roof of the
building over the main entrance. As
illustrated in Documents 1 and 2, the sign is in the form of the Corporate
logo. The provisions of the by-law
regulate the location, construction, alteration, repair and maintenance of all
exterior signs on private property. The
existing Signs By-law of the Old City of Ottawa and the by-laws of the former
City's of Nepean, Kanata, Vanier, Cumberland and area Townships prohibit roof
signs and animation.
DISCUSSION
The provisions of the by-law pertaining to roof signs and animation were introduced in response to the detrimental effects of roof mounted signs in general on the visual environs, often contributing to the proliferation of signs as experienced in major Cities across Canada and the United States. The Toronto skyline has been impacted by a proliferation of billboards and temporary signs installed on roofs, for example adjacent to the Gardiner Expressway and Lakeshore Blvd.
The prohibition of roof signs dates back to the first Signs By-laws of the Old City of Ottawa in 1962. These by-laws have contributed to the establishment of current views and vistas in the Nation's Capital. Both the NCC and the Ministry of Transportation, who also have jurisdiction over signs adjacent to ceremonial routes and Provincial Highways, also prohibit roof signs. The intent of the current by-law is to permit reasonable signage for identification and promotional advertising purposes, within established guidelines that strive to prevent sign pollution.
While the proposed sign is well designed and would not in itself create a negative effect on the streetscape, there is a concern with setting precedence for other roof signs. The effect of installing a sign or architectural feature on a building facade or over an entrance canopy that is below the roofline would be limited to the building design. However, a sign or feature mounted on the roof of a building affects the overall streetscape. In response to the technical circulation, one of the local sign companies questioned the City's position on this application. Sign companies are aware of the untapped potential market for roof signs and are poised to initiate similar applications, if Council indicates a willingness to consider such elements. In this case, there are building design options that would accommodate the desired signage without compromising the intent of the by-law. In terms of visibility, the site, building and existing pylon sign (illustrated in Document 3) are clearly visible to east and west bound traffic on the adjacent collector roadway.
The architect for Mercedes Benz, indicates that the design and site positioning of the tower was intended to receive the Star logo as a focal element. Further, structural reinforcement and mounting brackets were incorporated into the building structure including the electrical supply. The architect advised that the spinning star is a key component of the Mercedes Benz international facility identification program and appears in plans supplied as part of the various development related submissions. Mercedes Benz desires to develop and build a uniform program with consistent elements being used throughout the continent.
Notwithstanding the desire of the company to standardize the design of their projects, this is not justification to wave the requirements and intent of local by-laws. Approval of this application would permit a sign specifically prohibited under the by-law. Unless the by-law amendment is site specific to this property, the amendment would have the effect of permitting roof signs in District 4 on buildings zoned for commercial and industrial use.
Alternate Solution
In keeping with the provisions of the by-law, the design of the front facade could be modified to incorporate a parapet wall extending vertically above the front entrance and forming a structural component of the building. As a matter of right, a non-animated illuminated Mercedes Benz star logo could be installed on the face of a parapet wall. In many similar cases (example provided in Document 3 - MOBILIA), this has been a successful alternative.
Based on the foregoing, the Department is recommending refusal of the application.
CONSULTATION
Comments were solicited from
the residents/businesses within 60 metres of the property and legislated notice
was placed in local newspapers 14 days prior to consideration by the Planning
and Development Committee.
One respondent was in
support of the application and two opposed.
A local sign company expressed opposition unless roof signs are
permitted for all commercial establishments.
The project architect
provided comments, detailed in the Discussion Section, in support of the
application
The ward Councillor
expressed concern with setting a precedent but is willing to support this application.
FINANCIAL
IMPLICATIONS
N/A
SUPPORTING
DOCUMENTATION
Document 1 - Site Plan
Document 2 - Elevation
Drawing
Document 3 -
Photographs
DISPOSITION
Corporate Services
Department, Secretariat Services Branch to notify the applicant and the Ward
Councillor of City Council's decision.
