Report to / Rapport au:

Planning and Development Committee /

Comité de l’urbanisme et de l’aménagement

and Council / et au Conseil

16 October 2002 / le 16 octobre 2002

Submitted by / Soumis par: Ned Lathrop, General Manager / Directeur général

Development Services Department / Services d’aménagement

Contact / Personne-ressource: Sandra Garnett, Manager, Legal and Service Integration Gestionnaire, Insertion juridique et des services

580-2424, ext.41544 / sandra.garnett@ottawa.ca

Ref N°: ACS2002-DEV-BLD-0057

SUBJECT: SIGNS BY-LAW MINOR VARIANCE – 3340 FALLOWFIELD ROAD

OBJET: DÉROGATION MINEURE AU RÈGLEMENT MUNICIPAL SUR LES ENSEIGNES – 3340, CHEMIN FALLOWFIELD

REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS

1. That the Planning and Development Committee recommend Council refuse a Minor Variance to Signs By‑law 2-99 of the former City of Nepean, to allow this development to have two ground signs for this property with the multi-tenant pylon having an area of 9.1 square metres instead of the maximum permitted sign face area of 7 square metres.

2. That the Planning and Development Committee recommend Council approve a recommended Minor Variance to Signs By‑law 2-99 of the former City of Nepean, to allow this development to have two ground signs for this property provided that the signs conform with the area/height requirements in the by-law, are located at least 25 metres away from a residential zone and use only reversed illumination through an opaque sign face.

RECOMMANDATIONS DU RAPPORT

1. Que le Comité de l’urbanisme et de l’aménagement recommande au Conseil de refuser une dérogation mineure au Règlement municipal n^o 2-99 sur les enseignes, de l’ancienne Ville de Nepean, afin de permettre que le complexe compte deux enseignes au sol à cette propriété, une des enseignes (à locataires multiples) ayant une surface de 9,1 mètres carrés, alors que la surface maximale permise est de 7 mètres carrés.

2. Que le Comité de l’urbanisme et de l’aménagement recommande au Conseil d’approuver une dérogation mineure au Règlement municipal n^o 2-99 sur les enseignes, de l’ancienne Ville de Nepean, afin de permettre que le complexe compte deux enseignes au sol à cette propriété, pourvu que les enseignes soient conformes aux exigences du règlement municipal en matière de surface et de hauteur, qu’elles soient situées à 25 mètres au moins d’une zone résidentielle et qu’elles n’utilisent qu’un éclairage indirect à travers une surface opaque.

BACKGROUND

The property is located near the corner of Fallowfield and Woodroffe and across from the new transitway station. The proposed commercial plaza will have approximately eight units for the west building and a separate building housing a take-out restaurant. This development is zoned Neighbourhood Linear Commercial under the former City of Nepean zoning by-law and adjacent area land uses are residential to the south and west, commercial to the east and the transitway to the north.

Under the former Nepean Signs By-law, this site allows illuminated ground signage provided it complies with area restrictions that are determined by the by-law for a CN zone. In this zone, each development is permitted one ground sign with the maximum area permitted for a ground sign of 7 square metres with a height maximum of 3 metres. The purpose of these provisions for neighbourhood commercial signs is to allow identification and exposure of the site without taking away from the residential character of the adjacent area.

The applicant has stated in the application that the request for variance is to allow tenants exposure and visibility.

DISCUSSION

Recommendation 1

The Department has reviewed the request and is of the opinion that the variances as proposed by the applicant for ground signage would not be acceptable, since the scale of the multi-tenant sign combined with other signage would not be consistent with the intent of the by-law, is out of character for this area and would significantly impact the adjacent residential uses given it’s location near residential. This commercial activity will have small-scaled neighbourhood businesses that will also have wall signage that identifies the site appropriately. Allowing additional scale for a sign is not seen as necessary. The signage could be redesigned to be visible for the majority of traffic flow in this community.

The Signs By-law is consistent with the current design policies of the City for this area that state that signage should reinforce the attractiveness of the site rather than overwhelming the site and creating visual clutter. In addition, the City’s guidelines note that scale and location of the signage shall be oriented to pedestrian and local neighbourhood vehicular traffic. The intent of the area and setback provisions in this district is to lessen the impact on adjacent uses and to provide for consistency in commercial signage.

In this case, the proposed scale of the signage for the two signs would have a combined area of 15 square metres, which would significantly impact this community. Given the proposed location, the sign will be visible to adjacent residential neighbours to the west and would project illumination towards the residents during evening hours.

The Department is of the opinion that granting this request for variances would compromise the level playing field created by this by-law. In light of the above, the Department recommends refusal of this variance application.

Recommendation 2

The Department has discussed with the applicant and the Ward Councillor’s office the option of supporting a minor variance to the by-law allowing two ground signs on the development provided that each sign complies with the area, height and illumination restrictions found in the by-law. It is seen as acceptable to allow each separate building to have an individual ground sign since the western building has multiple tenants and will be developed at a larger scale than a typical CN corner store situation. In addition, allowing the take-out restaurant it’s own ground signage would be consistent with other adjacent commercial activity. The combined ground signage on site would have an area of 13 square metres with two ground signs. This option is recommended as a reasonable compromise that, in this case, will not jeopardize the intent of the by-law.

After reviewing the concerns generated from the circulation, staff concluded that allowing two conforming signs would not significantly impact adjacent residential uses since the location of the ground signs would be setback a substantial distance from residential and also be screened from homes by the two proposed buildings. In addition, approval would be appropriate given that a condition for installation requires having a 25 metre setback to residential. Restricting the illumination to project only through an opaque background will reduce the impact to adjacent residential. The applicant has also reduced the scale of the proposed McDonald’s sign which is not typical to the company format and also is similar in scale to other adjacent commercial signage along Fallowfield.

In light of the above, the Department recommends approval of Recommendation 2.

CONSULTATION

In response to the standard early notification to area residents and community and business groups, seven respondents were opposed to the application. The Southpointe Community Association does not support the variances. The Ward Councillor does not support the original application but does support Recommendation 2 taking into consideration the number of retail units in the mall.

Other Comments

• A sign with 7 square metres is big enough.
• I would support the installation of a second ground sign only if both signs adhere to the present by-law requirements. In return for granting a second ground sign, require assurances that business signs would only be posted on the front and not the side or back of all proposed structures.
• We do not support the variances. Why can’t the signs for all of the businesses, McDonald’s included, not fit on one sign that conforms to the by-law?
• I don’t think that the City should set the precedent for extra and/or larger signs on building sites bordering residential areas. Signage on the building itself would provide ample visibility combined with a multi-tenant plaza sign.

Response to Comments

The Department concurs with the comments and is recommending to the Committee that the application for variance be refused. However, given the functional situation of the two separate buildings within one development, an option of allowing two conforming signs is recommended for this site as a fair compromise which, given the conditions recommended, would not significantly impact upon adjacent residential uses.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

N/A

ATTACHMENTS

Document 1 Location Map

Document 2 Site Plan

Document 3 Elevation of Requested Multi-Tenant Sign

Document 4 Elevation of Conforming McDonalds Sign

DISPOSITION

Corporate Services Department, Secretariat Services Branch to notify the applicant, Marc Fortin, 2660 Southvale Crescent, Suite 316-K, Ottawa, Ontario, K1B 4W5; the sign agent, R & R Signs, 2295 Stevenage Dr., Unit 6, Ottawa, Ontario, K1G 3W1; and the Ward Councillor Jan Harder of City Council’s decision.

Location Map Document 1

Site Plan Document 2

Elevation of Requested Multi-Tenant Sign Document 3

Elevation of Conforming Mcdonalds Sign Document 4