|
SUBJECT: |
Signs
By-law Minor Variance - 400 Albert Street |
|
OBJET: |
DEROGATION MINEURE AU REGLEMENT MUNICIPAL SUR
LES ENSEIGNES - 400, RUE ALBERT |
REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS
That the Planning and Development Committee recommend that Council:
1. Approve a
variance to the Signs By-law 36-2000, of the old City of Ottawa, to permit two
internally illuminated wall signs at 400 Albert Street, installed on the east
façade as shown on Document 2, and located within 30 metres of a residential
zone, provided that the signs use reverse illumination only and are not
illuminated between the hours of 11
p.m. and 7 a.m.; and
2. Approve a
variance to the Signs By-law 36-2000, of the old City of Ottawa, to permit two
internally illuminated wall signs at 400 Albert Street, installed on the west
and south façades as shown on Documents 3 and 4, and located within 30 metres
of a residential zone, provided that the signs are installed on the first
storey, use reverse illumination only and are not illuminated between the hours
of 11 p.m. and 7 a.m.
RECOMMANDATIONS DU RAPPORT
Que le Comité de
l’urbanisme et de l’aménagement recommande au Conseil municipal :
1. d’approuver
une dérogation au Règlement municipal sur les enseignes no 36-2000
de l’ancienne Ville d’Ottawa afin de permettre l’installation d’enseignes
murales illuminées sur la façade est du 400, rue Albert, telle qu’elle est
décrite au document 2, et situées à moins de 30 mètres d’une zone
résidentielle, pourvu que les enseignes utilisent uniquement un éclairage
inverse, lequel ne sera pas en fonction entre 23 h et 7 h;
2. d’approuver
une dérogation au Règlement municipal sur les enseignes no 36-2000
de l’ancienne Ville d’Ottawa afin de permettre l’installation d’enseignes
murales illuminées sur les façades ouest et sud du 400, rue Albert, telle
qu’elle est décrite aux documents 3 et 4, et situées à moins de 30 mètres
d’une zone résidentielle, pourvu que les enseignes soient installées au premier
étage et utilisent uniquement un éclairage inverse, lequel ne sera pas en
fonction entre 23 h et 7 h.
BACKGROUND
The
property is located in the central area abutting Albert, Lyon, Slater and Bay
Streets. The existing bank use is
located on a property that is zoned residential (see Document 1), but permits
the bank/office use. Adjacent area land
uses are primarily residential to the south, institutional to the west and
commercial to the north and east. Under
the Signs By-law, this site is designated as a District 2 category that allows
only externally illuminated wall signage provided it complies with various
setbacks to the property lines and to adjacent residential zones.
Permits
have been issued for the two existing east façade signs without an illumination
component. Permits have not been issued
as yet for the existing Bay/Slater signage.
The
applicant applied for the variance to allow the illumination component to be
later activated if carried by the Committee. The proposed illumination would
be back-lit reversed illumination. The
applicant contends that the purpose of the signs is to identify the property
and to provide better visibility for the CS Co-op bank.
Based
on a review of the scale, the signs would comply with by-law area
regulations. The signs included in
Recommendation 1 (see Document 2) have an area of 6.3 square metres per sign.
The signs requested for Recommendation 2 have an area of 4 square metres per
sign. Although wall signs are permitted, illuminated signs must be located 30
metres from an adjacent residential zone.
The proposed signs would be setback approximately 20 metres. The intent of this general provision is to
reduce the impact of light-spillover on nearby residential uses.
DISCUSSION
Recommendation 1
The
Department has reviewed the request and feels that the variance for the
proposed illuminated signs located within 20 metres of an adjacent residential
zone would be acceptable provided certain conditions are imposed to lessen the
impact of the illuminated component on the community. These conditions are deemed necessary to address the concerns
expressed by the community and to be in keeping with the intent of the Signs
By-law.
The
signs on the east facade are perceived as having less impact than the signs on
the west and south façade requested in Recommendation 2. The latter signs would directly face
residential apartment buildings. Given
that this area has a mix of commercial/residential land uses, illumination as
suggested in Recommendation 1 would allow the business visibility without
adversely affecting the adjacent residents.
Recommendation 2
Similar
to Recommendation 1, the Department has reviewed the request and feels that a
conditional variance for the illuminated signs located within 20 metres of an
adjacent residential zone would be appropriate. However, given the comments and concerns received from the
adjacent residents, an additional condition is recommended to install the
illuminated signage on the first storey in order to lessen the impact from
light spill-over on the apartment buildings located across the street at Bay
and Slater.
This
type of signage would be similar to the former first storey signage that
existed on this site prior to façade renovations. The former signs were approved under permit and a west façade
sign was subject to a variance for illuminated signage that was granted for a
sign on the first storey in 1994. The
rationale for approval was that the signage was small in scale, not visible
from the abutting residential uses and would be identical to the existing
approved sign on the Slater Street façade.
Given the proximity to residential uses, it is recommended to limit any
proposed illuminated signs to something similar to what existed prior to the
renovations of the building. By
lowering the signage to the first storey, it is felt that the signs would be
less visible to residential uses.
Therefore, it is felt that the conditional variance found in Recommendation
2 would provide adequate visibility for the business without adversely
affecting the adjacent residents.
CONSULTATION
In
response to the standard early notification to area residents, community and
business groups, and the Ward Councillor, fifteen responses were received,
seven were opposed to the application, six supported the application and two
had no objections. Concern was mainly
on the illumination factor of the signs.
Comments were as follows;
·
Councillor Arnold
stated, “Although I object to the installation of non-conforming signs in
violation of the by-law, and requests for approval for the “as-built” sign
after the fact – I would not object to the regularization of this sign on one
condition: that the commemorative bronze plaque honouring the poet Archibald
Lampman be re-installed on the exterior of the building once the renovations
are completed. The plaque was erected
when the Lampman House was demolished in the early 1960s for the office
building now containing the CS Co-op, and I do not wish to see it discarded.”
·
Councillor Arnold’s
comments on the Bay/Slater signs were, “These signs were installed in
contravention of the Signs By-law, and this practice should not be condoned by
an automatic approval of the minor variance to legalize the violation after the
fact. I would prefer to see the Bay
Street sign lowered to the original first floor location of the previous sign,
and the internal illumination discontinued.
As
stated in my previous comments, any
approvals should be contingent on the building owners restoring the “Archibald
Lampman” commemorative bronze plaque that was located on the wall of the
building at Slater and Bay Streets.”
·
“I fail to see why the
present sign needs to be illuminated.
We do not want more light pollution in this area. The business of the Co-op takes place mainly
in daylight hours, therefore, the present signs would see to be sufficient.”
·
“Night
time doesn’t look like night time anymore with all the existing illumination;
makes it difficult to sleep not to mention the electrical or energy pollution
this creates.”
·
“All
it takes is one sign to get approval then anyone can light up signs anywhere
and we will have a miniature Time Square.”
·
The
existing signs have significant visibility.
Response to Comments
Regarding the Councillor’s request for a condition, it is the Department’s policy to only request conditions that are related to the proposed signage such as location, types of illumination and hours of operation. The Department wrote to CS Co-op to inquire about the plaque and was informed that the CS Co-op fully intends to install this commemorative plaque in its original location as soon as it is feasible.
Given
the mixed use nature of this street, the Department is of the opinion that
illuminated signs at this location would be appropriate provided that the
lighting is restricted through conditions which will lessen it’s impact on
adjacent residential uses. The Department has
recommended conditional approval of the variances provided that the lighting
impact is reduced by reversed illumination, hours of operation and location as
noted in the recommendations.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
N/A
ATTACHMENTS
Document 1 Location
Map
Document 2 East
Elevation Signs
Document 3 Bay
Street Sign
Document 4 Slater Street Sign
DISPOSITION
Corporate Services
Department, Secretariat Services Branch
to notify the agent, Eyecom, Attention: Reg Irving, 23-81 Auriga Drive, Ottawa,
Ontario. K2E 7Y5 and the owner CS CO-OP, Attention: Ian Glasgow, 400 Albert Street,
Ottawa, Ontario, K1R 5B2 of City Council’s decision.
Location Map Document
1
East
Elevation Signs Document
2
Bay
Street Sign Document
3
Slater
Street Sign Document
4
