Item - 2026.SB20.2

The Sign Variance Committee:

1. Granted the variance to section 694-15.A as required to allow for the issuance of a permit respecting the erection and display of the Proposed Sign contained in the Proposed Sign Variance, as further described in Attachment 1 to the report (January 23, 2026) from the Project Director, Business Transformation and Citywide Priorities, Toronto Building.

A decision of the Sign Variance Committee, in the case of a decision to refuse to grant a variance, is final and binding on the date the decision was issued; and in the case of a decision to grant a variance with conditions, the decision is final and binding 21 days after the date the decision was issued unless an application to consider is filed by the ward councillor in accordance with §694-30S of Chapter 694 of the City of Toronto Municipal Code.

This report concerns an appeal of the decision of the Chief Building Official and Executive Director, Toronto Building (“CBO”) respecting an application for a Sign Variance (the “Proposed Sign Variance”).

Kramer Design Associated Limited (the "Applicant") stated they were authorized by GWL Realty Advisors. (the "Owner") to apply for the Proposed Sign Variance, described in Attachment 1. The Proposed Sign Variance pertains to one variance sought for one first party electronic wall sign (the "Proposed Sign") intended to offer identification and information for on-site services and tenants located on property municipally known as 33 Yonge Street (the “Subject Premises”).

After conducting a review and public consultation in accordance with the requirements of the Sign By-law, the CBO made a decision to refuse to grant the requested variance on the basis that the Proposed Sign Variance did not meet all of the mandatory criteria. After the issuance of the CBO’s decision refusing to grant the variance requested for the Proposed Sign Variance, the Applicant filed an appeal of the CBO’s decision.

As a result of the Applicant filing the appeal, the Sign Variance Committee (“SVC”) is now required to conduct an appeal de novo, meaning that the SVC shall determine whether the Applicant has demonstrated that the Proposed Sign Variance meets all eight criteria, on the basis of the information presented to the SVC. The SVC may make a decision to refuse or grant the variance requested by the Applicant for the Proposed Sign Variance, or to make a decision to grant different variances, or impose conditions which the Applicant did not include in the Proposed Sign Variance.