2. DIRECTIONAL FARM SIGNAGE PROGRAM

PROGRAMME SUR LES PANNEAUX INDICATEURS EN MILIEU RURAL

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS AS AMENDED

That Council:

1. Approve the establishment of a Directional Farm Signage Program and amendments to the following by-laws and policy to accommodate Directional Farm Signs as detailed in Document 1 as amended:

a. Signs and Advertising Devices on City Roads By-law 2003-520

b. Permanent Signs on Private Property By-law 2005-439

c. Temporary Signs on Private Property By-law 2004-239.

2. Approve the enforcement program that reflects the phased implementation of the new Program as set out in the report.

3. Direct staff to undertake a review of the impact of the establishment of the Directional Farm Signage Program and report back the results of the review by 2008 year end, with recommendations of any further enhancements or corrections as may be required and that the review include consultation with the stakeholder group.

4. Approve:

a. the temporary establishment of .5 FTE immediately to kick start the Program, and

b. the temporary establishment of an additional 1.98 FTEs, subject to future budget approval, for a period commencing January 1, 2007 and ending December 31, 2008, to enable the implementation and assessment of the new Directional Farm Signage Program.

5. Approve the establishment of a $75.00 service administration fee per Directional Farm Sign, approved pursuant to the provisions of the Signs and Advertising Devices on City Roads By-law 2003-520, to recover the traffic engineering costs in verifying and approving the location of the signs in the right-of-way;

6. WHEREAS Item 11 of Agenda 30 of the Agricultural and Rural Affairs Committee proposes to amend By-law 2003-2005, a by-law respecting signs and advertising devices on City roads to introduce new definitions in Section 1 of the by-law in recognition of the new Directional Farm Signs;

AND WHEREAS the proposed amendments set out in Document 1 to Item 11 of Agenda 30 includes the new definition of “directional farm sign panel” and that the definition should be referring to a portion of the horizontal sign format and not the entire sign;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT Council approve an amendment to the definition in Document 1 by inserting “the portion of” after the word “means” and before “an off-premises sign…”, such that the definition will read as:

“directional farm sign panel” means the portion of an off-premises sign that provides directions to a registered farm and the farm related products or services offered by the registered farm” or directions to a farmer’s market and the products offered at the site of the farmer’s market.

RecommandationS MODIFIÉes du comitÉ

Le Conseil municipal reccomande:

1. d’approuver la mise en place d’un programme sur les panneaux indicateurs en milieu rural ainsi que l’adoption de modifications aux règlements municipaux ci-dessous et d’une politique visant à permettre l’installation de ces nouveaux panneaux, tel qu’il est énoncé dans le document 1 et modifié :

a. Règlement n^o 2003-520 sur les affiches et le matériel publicitaires en bordure de route;

b. Règlement n^o 2005-439 sur les enseignes permanentes sur les propriétés privées;

c. Règlement municipal n^o 2004-239 sur les enseignes temporaires sur les propriétés privées.

2. d’approuver le programme d’application qui tient compte de la mise en œuvre progressive du nouveau programme, tel qu’il est indiqué dans le rapport;

3. de charger le personnel d’évaluer l’incidence qu’aura la mise en œuvre d’un programme sur les panneaux indicateurs en milieu rural, notamment au moyen d’un processus de consultation avec un groupe d’intérêt, et de présenter, avant la fin de l’année 2008, les conclusions de l’étude ainsi que des recommandations concernant toute amélioration ou correction qui se serait révélée nécessaire;

4. d’approuver :

a. l’établissement temporaire de 0,5 ETP (équivalent temps plein) dans l’immédiat pour lancer le programme;

b. l’établissement temporaire de 1,98 ETP de plus, sous réserve de l’approbation du budget, pour la période allant du 1^er janvier 2007 au 31 décembre 2008, afin de permettre la mise en œuvre et l’évaluation du programme sur les panneaux indicateurs en milieu rural;

5. d’approuver l’imposition de frais d’administration de 75 $ par panneau indicateur approuvés en vertu des dispositions du Règlement n^o 2003-520 sur les affiches et le matériel publicitaires en bordure de route afin de recouvrer les coûts d’ingénierie de la circulation engendrés par la vérification et l’approbation de l’emplacement des panneaux dans l’emprise routière.

6. ATTENDU QUE le point 11 de l’ordre jour 30 du Comité de l’agriculture et des questions rurales propose de modifier le Règlement 2003-2005, un règlement sur les affiches et le matériel publicitaires en bordure de route, de manière à ajouter les nouvelles définitions à la section 1 du Règlement pour tenir compte des nouveaux panneaux indicateurs en milieu rural;

ET ATTENDU QUE les modifications proposées qui sont énoncées dans le document 1 au point 11 de l’ordre du jour 30 comprennent la nouvelle définition de « panneau indicateur en milieu rural » et que la définition devrait faire référence à une portion du panneau horizontal et non à tout le panneau;

EN CONSÉQUENCE, IL EST RÉSOLU QUE le Conseil approuve la modification de la définition du document 1 en y ajoutant le terme « la portion » après celui de « signifie » et avant le segment « d’un panneau se trouvant hors de la propriété » de telle sorte que la nouvelle définition se lit comme suit :

« panneau indicateur en milieu rural » signifie la portion d’un panneau se trouvant hors de la propriété qui indique comment se rendre à un établissement agricole autorisé pour accéder à ses produits ou à ses services ou encore à un marché fermier pour y acheter les produits qui y sont offerts.

Documentation

1. Acting Deputy City Manager, Planning and Growth Management report dated 28 June 2006 (ACS2006-PGM-BLD-0016).

Report to/Rapport au :

Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee

Comité de l'agriculture et des questions rurales

and Council / et au Conseil

28 June 2006 / le 28 juin 2006

Submitted by/Soumis par : John L. Moser,

A/ Deputy City Manager/Directeur municipal adjoint interim,

Planning and Growth Management/Urbanisme et Gestion de la croissance

Contact Person/Personne ressource : Arlene Gregoire, Director

Building Services and Chief Building Official/Direction des services du bâtiment et Chef du service du bâtiment

(613) 580-2424 41425, arlene.gregoire@ottawa.ca

City Wide

Ref N°: ACS2006-PGM-BLD-0016

SUBJECT:	DIRECTIONAL FARM SIGNAGE PROGRAM

OBJET :	programme sur les panneaux indicateurs en milieu rural

REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS

That the Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee recommendation Council:

1. Approve the establishment of a Directional Farm Signage Program and amendments to the following by-laws and policy to accommodate Directional Farm Signs as detailed in Document 1:

d. Signs and Advertising Devices on City Roads By-law 2003-520

e. Permanent Signs on Private Property By-law 2005-439

f. Temporary Signs on Private Property By-law 2004-239.

2. Approve the enforcement program that reflects the phased implementation of the new Program as set out in the report.

4. Approve:

c. the temporary establishment of .5 FTE immediately to kick start the Program, and

d. the temporary establishment of an additional 1.98 FTEs, subject to future budget approval, for a period commencing January 1, 2007 and ending December 31, 2008, to enable the implementation and assessment of the new Directional Farm Signage Program.

RECOMMANDATIONS DU RAPPORT

Le Comité de l'agriculture et des questions rurales recommandera au Conseil :

1. d’approuver la mise en place d’un programme sur les panneaux indicateurs en milieu rural ainsi que l’adoption de modifications aux règlements municipaux ci‑dessous et d’une politique visant à permettre l’installation de ces nouveaux panneaux, tel qu’il est énoncé dans le document 1 :

a. Règlement n^o 2003‑520 sur les affiches et le matériel publicitaires en bordure de route;

b. Règlement n^o 2005-439 sur les enseignes permanentes sur les propriétés privées;

c. Règlement municipal n^o 2004-239 sur les enseignes temporaires sur les propriétés privées;

2. d’approuver le programme d’application qui tient compte de la mise en œuvre progressive du nouveau programme, tel qu’il est indiqué dans le rapport;

4. d’approuver :

a. d’approuver l’établissement temporaire de 0,5 ETP (équivalent temps plein) dans l’immédiat pour lancer le programme;

b. d’approuver l’établissement temporaire de 1,98 de plus, sous réserve de l’approbation du budget, pour la période allant du 1^er janvier 2007 au 31 décembre 2008, afin de permettre la mise en œuvre et l’évaluation du programme sur les panneaux indicateurs en milieu rural;

5. d’approuver l’imposition de frais d’administration de 75 $ par panneau indicateur approuvés en vertu des dispositions du Règlement n^o 2003‑520 sur les affiches et le matériel publicitaires en bordure de route afin de recouvrer les coûts d’ingénierie de la circulation engendrés par la vérification et l’approbation de l’emplacement des panneaux dans l’emprise routière.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Directional Farm Signage Program is a unique initiative that will address two significant issues: i. that of providing distinct City-sanctioned signage that will assist the public in locating farm-based businesses in the rural areas in recognition that rural businesses are more difficult to locate due to distances traveled and a lack of local landmarks or way finding guides, and ii. that of tackling the illegal sign proliferation along rural roadways as these detract from the rural views and render legitimate signs ineffectual.

The Program is also a first in Ontario, which befits the fact the City of Ottawa comprises the largest farming community of all major Canadian cities and is a positive outcome of the Rural Summit held in November 2005. The stakeholder group provided many ideas and the resultant proposal represents a balance between ensuring the public rights-of-way remain safe while providing opportunities to assist the farming community by relaxing existing restrictions and by introducing a new sign category.

Municipalities have always been protective of the rights-of-way in that signage that does not serve to promote the safe use of the roadway is simply not permitted. This strict approach is for a good reason: municipalities are responsible for ensuring the public rights-of-way are safe for all and must ensure hazards are not introduced into the right-of-way. Consequently, only a limited number of permanent signs (traffic control signage and a narrow group of trailblazing signs) have been permitted in the right-of-way. Signs that advertise a product, a service or, a business referred to as off-premise signs, have not been permitted in the right-of-way as these signs do not provide a public service. Instead, these signs create a distraction from the necessary traffic control signage that ensures the safe usage of roadways or way finding.

The Province of Ontario introduced the Tourist Orientation Destination Signs (TODS) that provide way finding to a specific group of destinations along the provincial highways. Following amalgamation, Public Works and Services established a similar program called the Tourism and Public Service Signs Policy (TPSSP) to, among other things, continue the Province’s system throughout the City, including the criteria and guidelines established for the TODS. The Directional Farm Signage Program proposes to relax these criteria and guidelines for farm-based businesses and to introduce new features and options to enhance way finding to these agricultural businesses.

As this Program is unique and ground breaking and as the impact of introducing a number of new signs and new standards is not known and as there is concern that new signs and relaxed regulations will result in more proliferation, a review of the impact of the new Program and its implementation will be undertaken and a report will be presented to Council following the end of the phased-implementation (November 30, 2008).

During the phased-implementation, sign owners will be provided time to remove their signs based on the timeframes for compliance set out in Recommendation 2. Any new signs installed in the rights-of-way after January 1, 2006 will be removed without notice.

Additional resources will be required to ensure the success of the new Program. Key to this Program’s success is the removal of illegal signs and control over the proliferation of signs in the rural areas. The stakeholders clearly advocated that adequate resources be in place to deliver on the service paid for and to clear up the roadside signs that, if left untouched, will undermine the effectiveness of the Directional Farm Signs and trailblazer signs. The cost of the additional resources will be covered partly by an administrative service fee and subject to Council approval, funding from the annual budget allotment of the Rural Affairs Office for the implementation period.

Highlights of the new Directional Signage Program are:

1. A new sign category for permanent signs in the right-of-way:

The Directional Farm Sign is a permanent sign similar to the Province’s TODS signs located along the provincial highways. The signs will have white lettering on a blue background with the City of Ottawa logo at the top, the farm-based business’ corporate logo, with distance and direction indicators below. In addition, the farm-based business will be able to have a slide-in section below the panel for messages advising the public they are open/ouvert, or closed/fermé, and/or the produce available for sale.

While the municipality will undertake the technical/engineering review to confirm the appropriate locations for the signs, the manufacture and installation of the signs will be carried out by a third-party contractor in order to minimize the requirement for new resource allocations and funding.

The manufacturing, installation and maintenance costs of the signs will be the responsibility of the farm-based businesses as well as the costs associated with determining the optimal location of the signs.

The Program will be implemented over a period of 28 months to provide the farm-based businesses and other qualified businesses under the existing TPSSP time to phase out their non-conforming signs and obtain the Farm Directional Signage. This phased-implementation also provides staff time to assess the impact of the Program and to identify any further refinements.

2. More flexibility for temporary Farm Accessory signs (A-Frames) in the right-of-way:

The current Signs and Advertising Devices on City Roads By-law 2003-520 imposes a number of restrictions on Farm Accessory Signs to minimize proliferation and the safety hazards these may pose.

Among the proposed enhancements are:

§ the reduced setback from the pavement, where open ditches are a contiguous part of the road allowance, to 0.5 metre, as the existing set back place the signs in the ditch, and

§ to allow these signs to remain for the duration of the sale of seasonal produce instead of monthly permit renewals.

3. A new sign category of permanent signs on private property:

The Permanent Signs on Private Property By-law currently allows farm identification signs on the farm property only. The proposed changes will permit permanent signs to be installed on private property for the purpose of providing directional information to a farm-based business not located on the same property as the sign.

4. More flexibility for temporary farm signs on private property:

The proposed amendments to the Temporary Signs on Private Property By-law will allow greater flexibility for location and duration of the signs. These temporary farm signs will be allowed to be located off-premise without the requirement of a permit.

Way finding needs in the rural areas were identified for all rural businesses. However, in view of the issues regarding the continued viability of the City’s farming community raised during the Rural Summit and limited staff resources, priority was assigned to developing, as a first phase, a directional signage program for farm-based businesses. The next phase, that of meeting with the community and other rural businesses to explore way finding and signage needs, will proceed late in fall 2006 and early 2007 for a projected implementation in 2007.

Financial Implications:

The funding required for 2006 will be covered by savings accrued in the Rural Affairs Office due to gapping. Subject to Council approval of the 2007 and 2008 budgets, funding is required from the annual allotment for rural initiatives to cover the start up costs to 2008 year end. The planned assessment of the Directional Farm Signs Program will include a determination of on-going costs, and should the assessment determine the requirement for new funding, this will be identified in the report to Council scheduled for end of 2008 and as part of the 2009 budget proposal by the line departments.

Public Consultation/Input:

Meetings were held on November 24, 2005, January 18, February 27, May 1, May 16 and June 5, 2006 involving a number of stakeholders. The stakeholders included members of the Rural Summit Agriculture Sub-Committee, farmers/producers, farm-based businesses, farmers’ markets and fairgrounds, and sugarbush operators. In addition, presentations were made to the Rural Task Force (May 15), the Manotick BIA (April 28 and May 11) and to the Business Advisory Committee (June 11).

RÉSUMÉ

Hypothèses et analyse :

Le programme sur les panneaux indicateurs en milieu rural est une initiative unique qui permettra d’aborder deux grandes préoccupations : i) fournir un système de signalisation distinct et sanctionné par la Ville qui aidera le public à situer les entreprises agricoles, en reconnaissance du fait que celles‑ci sont plus difficiles à trouver en raison des longues distances à parcourir pour s’y rendre et du manque de points de repère et d’indications permettant de s’orienter; et ii) s’attaquer au problème de la prolifération des panneaux non autorisés en bordure des routes rurales, ceux‑ci créant un obstacle visuel et nuisant à l’efficacité des panneaux dûment autorisés.

De plus, ce programme, résultat positif du Sommet rural tenu en novembre 2005, est le premier du genre à voir le jour en Ontario, ce dont il ne faut pas s’étonner puisque Ottawa possède la plus importante communauté agricole de toutes les grandes villes canadiennes. Le groupe d’intérêt a formulé de nombreuses suggestions et la proposition qui en découle représente un juste milieu entre la nécessité d’assurer la sécurité des emprises routières et la volonté d’aider la communauté agricole en assouplissant les restrictions actuelles et en créant une nouvelle catégorie de panneaux de signalisation.

Les municipalités ont toujours préservé les emprises routières en interdisant carrément les panneaux qui ne servent pas à promouvoir l’usage sécuritaire des routes. Une telle sévérité se justifie, car il incombe aux municipalités de s’assurer que les emprises routières sont sécuritaires pour tous et qu’aucun danger n’y est introduit. C’est pourquoi un nombre limité de panneaux permanents (signalisation relative à la régulation de la circulation et quantité restreinte de panneaux d’indications routières) ont pu être installés dans l’emprise routière. Les panneaux publicitaires éloignés annonçant un produit, un service ou une entreprise n’ont jamais été autorisés dans les emprises routières, car ils n’offrent pas un service public et ne font que détourner l’attention des automobilistes des panneaux de signalisation routière importants pour la sécurité et l’orientation des usagers de la route.

Le gouvernement de l’Ontario a mis en œuvre un programme intitulé Tourism Oriented Directional Signing (TODS) qui vise à fournir des indications pour se rendre à certaines destinations le long des routes provinciales. Après la fusion municipale, Services et Travaux publics a mis en place une initiative semblable intitulée Politique sur la signalisation pour les lieux touristiques et les services publics (PSLTSP), entre autres dans le but d’étendre à la ville le système provincial en suivant notamment les lignes directrices et les critères établis pour le programme TODS. Le programme des panneaux indicateurs en milieu rural propose l’assouplissement de ces balises pour les entreprises agricoles et l’adoption de nouveaux éléments et de nouvelles options améliorant les indications qui permettent de repérer les entreprises en question.

Comme ce programme est novateur et unique en son genre, que l’incidence qu’auront l’ajout de nouveaux panneaux et l’adoption de nouvelles normes est encore inconnue, et que certains craignent que la nouvelle signalisation et l’assouplissement des règlements aient pour effet d’accroître la prolifération, les répercussions du nouveau programme et de sa mise en œuvre seront étudiées et un rapport sera présenté au Conseil à la fin de la mise en œuvre progressive (30 novembre 2008).

La période de transition laisse aux propriétaires le temps de retirer leurs panneaux, conformément aux délais de conformité établis dans la recommandation n^o 2. Tout autre panneau installé dans l’emprise routière après le 1^er janvier 2006 sera retiré sans préavis.

Des ressources additionnelles seront nécessaires pour assurer la réussite du nouveau programme, laquelle suppose l’enlèvement des panneaux non autorisés et le contrôle de la prolifération des panneaux en milieu rural. Les parties intéressées ont clairement fait valoir que les ressources appropriées devraient être en place pour assurer la prestation du service pour lequel elles paient et pour ôter des emprises routières les panneaux qui, s’ils y sont laissés, nuiront à l’efficacité des panneaux indicateurs des entreprises agricoles et des panneaux d’indications routières. Le coût des ressources additionnelles sera en partie couvert par l’imposition de frais d’administration et, sous réserve de l’approbation du Conseil, par un financement provenant de l’affectation budgétaire annuelle du Bureau des affaires rurales pour la période de mise en œuvre.

Principaux éléments du nouveau programme de panneaux indicateurs en milieu rural

1. Nouvelle catégorie de panneaux permanents dans l’emprise routière :

Le nouveau panneau indicateur est permanent et ressemble aux panneaux du programme TODS installés en bordure des autoroutes provinciales. Il est caractérisé par un lettrage blanc sur fond bleu et comporte le logo de la Ville comme en‑tête, celui de l’entreprise concernée, ainsi que la distance à parcourir et des indications routières au bas. De plus, l’entreprise pourra ajouter dans une section distincte sous le panneau principal des palettes portant les mentions « Open/Ouvert » ou « Closed/Fermé » ou précisant le produit qui est offert.

C’est la municipalité qui procédera aux études techniques et d’ingénierie permettant de confirmer l’emplacement approprié des panneaux, mais c’est un tiers entrepreneur qui fabriquera et installera ceux‑ci afin que soit réduit au minimum le besoin de fonds supplémentaires et d’une nouvelle affectation des ressources.

Les entreprises agricoles devront assumer les coûts de fabrication, d’installation et d’entretien des panneaux, ainsi que ceux associés à la détermination de l’emplacement où ceux‑ci devront être installés.

Le programme sera mis en place sur une période de deux ans pour donner aux entreprises agricoles et aux autres entreprises admissibles au titre de la PSLTSP le temps de retirer leurs panneaux non autorisés et d’obtenir les nouveaux panneaux. Cette mise en œuvre progressive permettra également au personnel municipal d’évaluer l’incidence du programme et de cerner toute amélioration nécessaire.

2. Souplesse accrue pour les panneaux accessoires de ferme temporaires (panneaux-chevalets) dans l’emprise routière :

Le Règlement n^o 2003-520 sur les affiches et le matériel publicitaires en bordure de route impose actuellement un certain nombre de contraintes en ce qui concerne l’emplacement des panneaux accessoires. Ces exigences ont pour but de réduire au minimum la prolifération des panneaux en bordure de route et les dangers que ceux‑ci peuvent présenter pour la sécurité.

Diverses améliorations ont été proposées, notamment les suivantes :

a. réduire à 0,5 m la marge de recul depuis la chaussée aux endroits où un fossé ouvert jouxte l’emprise routière, car avec celle qui est fixée actuellement, le panneau devra être installé dans le fossé;

b. permettre que les panneaux demeurent en place pendant toute la saison de vente de produits saisonniers au lieu d’imposer le renouvellement mensuel du permis.

3. Nouvelle catégorie de panneaux permanents sur les propriétés privées :

Dans sa forme actuelle, le Règlement sur les enseignes permanentes sur les propriétés privées autorise l’installation d’un panneau indicateur d’entreprise agricole uniquement sur la propriété agricole faisant l’objet de la publicité. Les modifications proposées autoriseront l’installation de panneaux d’indications routières permanents sur une propriété privée autre que celle de l’entreprise agricole sur laquelle portent les renseignements.

4. Souplesse accrue pour les panneaux temporaires sur les propriétés privées :

Les modifications proposées au Règlement sur les enseignes temporaires sur les propriétés privées permettront plus de souplesse quant à l’emplacement d’un panneau et à l’étendue de la période pendant laquelle il peut demeurer en place. Ces panneaux temporaires pourront être installés ailleurs que sur la propriété visée sans qu’un permis ne soit requis.

Les besoins en matière d’indications routières ont été définis pour toutes les entreprises en milieu rural. Cependant, compte tenu des préoccupations exprimées dans le cadre du Sommet rural au sujet de la viabilité de la communauté agricole d’Ottawa et des ressources limitées en fait de personnel, la priorité a été accordée à l’élaboration d’un programme portant sur les panneaux indicateurs pour les entreprises en milieu rural. L’étape suivante, qui consiste à rencontrer la communauté agricole et d’autres entreprises en milieu rural afin d’évaluer leurs besoins en matière de signalisation et d’indications routières, sera entreprise à la fin de l’automne 2006 et au début de 2007, en prévision de la mise en œuvre du programme au cours de l’année 2007.

Répercussions financières :

Le financement requis pour 2006 proviendra des économies réalisées par le Bureau des affaires rurales grâce au gapping. Le financement nécessaire pour couvrir les frais initiaux et poursuivre le programme jusqu’à la fin de 2008 proviendra du montant affecté chaque année aux initiatives rurales, sous réserve de l’approbation des budgets de 2007 et de 2008 par le Conseil. L’évaluation prévue du programme comprendra la détermination des coûts permanents de mise en œuvre et si elle établit le besoin d’un financement supplémentaire, il faudra l’indiquer dans le rapport qui doit être présenté au Conseil à la fin de 2008 et les services responsables devront l’inscrire dans le projet de budget de 2009.

Consultation publique / commentaires :

Des réunions ont eu lieu le 24 novembre 2005, le 18 janvier, le 27 février, le 1^er et le 16 mai de même que le 5 juin 2006. Y ont participé un certain nombre d’intéressés, parmi lesquels des membres du sous‑comité sur l’agriculture du Sommet rural, des agriculteurs et des producteurs, des propriétaires d’entreprises agricoles, ainsi que des exploitants de marchés de producteurs, de champs de foire et de cabanes à sucre. De plus, des présentations ont été faites au groupe de travail sur le Sommet rural (le 15 mai), aux représentants de la ZAC de Manotick (les 28 avril et 11 mai) et au Comité consultatif sur les affaires (le 11 juin).

BACKGROUND

On September 13, 2005, Planning and Environment Committee recommended to City Council approval of the new Permanent Signs on Private Property By-law 2005- 439. In addition, in view of concerns that locating rural businesses was more difficult due to distances travelled and a lack of local landmarks or way finding guides, the Committee recommended that Council:

"Approve that the Planning and Growth Management Department undertake a review of specific issues identified through public consultation relating to directional and community signs in rural areas and report back on options and by-law amendments by December 31, 2005."

A similar request was made through the Agriculture Sub-Committee of the Rural Summit held on November 15, 2005, following the Sub-Committee's review of factors (eg., market conditions, BSE, higher operating costs, etc.) and regulations that together, impeded the farming community's ability to remain viable. The Sub-Committee offered a number of options that would assist the farming community and with regards to signage, the Sub-Committee identified the need for more permissive regulations to accommodate way finding to farm-based businesses.

The following options for solution were submitted:

1. "Examine the performance criteria of existing sign by-laws that deal with farm accessory signs (A-frames) etc. and determine what criteria are reasonable or not;"

2. "Develop a new permanent sign category for off-premise directional signs to be located on private property to assist farm operations in directing customers to their premises and exempt the new type of sign from the requirement to obtain a sign permit;" and

3. "Review and identify a proposal for directional signs to be installed in the road allowance, similar to the signs installed by the Ministry of Transportation along highways."

As the initiative involved amending three by-laws and involved three departments: Planning and Growth Management (Building Services Branch); Public Works and Services (Traffic and Parking Operations); and Community and Protective Services (By-law Services), a multi-departmental team was established to consult with the agricultural community in order to address the need for more flexible regulations and to develop a new directional signage program.

Way finding needs in the rural areas was identified for all rural businesses. However, in view of the issues regarding the continued viability of the City’s farming community raised during the Rural Summit and limited staff resources, priority was assigned to developing a directional signage program for farm-based businesses. The next phase of the initiative, that of meeting with the community and other rural businesses to explore way finding and signage needs, will proceed late in fall 2006 and winter 2007.

Meetings were held November 2005 through to June 2006 with the agricultural community to identify concerns, needs, constraints, and the development of the proposed directional signage program for farm-based businesses. The stakeholder group was comprised of members of the Rural Summit Agriculture Sub-Committee, farmers/producers, farm-based businesses, farmers’ markets and fairgrounds, and sugarbush operators. A summary of comments is provided in Document 2.

In reviewing the existing regulations and in developing the new directional signage program, the following factors were considered and analysed:

· farm-based businesses’ way finding needs

· safety along rural rights-of-way – the municipality is responsible for ensuring the rights-of-way[1] are safe for motorists and pedestrians. Thus safety is assigned the highest priority for determining the usage and access to the right-of-way

· traffic signage requirements – e.g., stop signs, yield signs, distance between signs and intersections, etc.

· off premise advertising is not allowed in the right-of-way as such signs do not enhance the safe use of rights-of-way

· directional signage provides a public service

· proliferation of signs and illegal signs – not supported by the general public and these constitute hazards and detract from the legitimate signs

· road maintenance operations – signs in the right-of-way must not impede or interfere with maintenance operations

· the demand for space in the rights-of-way is high

· impact of new directional signs – how many signs can the right-of-way accommodate before clustering and proliferation of directional signs become an issue

· need for an incremental process for introducing new signage in the rights-of-way

· location of directional signs (setback, r-o-w versus private property, rural areas)

· directional sign design and installation

· # of signs within a defined radius distance of farm operation

· installation services and replacement signs

· resource requirements

· costs/fees/cost recovery

· "permitting” process and lifespan of a permit

To better understand the way finding needs of the farm-based businesses, a survey of the rights-of-way in the rural areas was conducted. The survey revealed that there was a proliferation of signs of all shapes and sizes and varying states of repair located in the rights-of-way and on private property. At certain locations, the clustering of illegal signs was so prolific that the traffic and directional signs installed by the City were rendered ineffective.

It is a guiding principle for signage in the right-of-way that signage should provide a public service only and be designed and located in such a way as to promote road safety. That is, signs in the rights-of-way must improve, not diminish, the level of safety for users of all modes, including bicycles, transit and other vehicles and pedestrians. Characteristics include:

(a) ease of comprehension

(b) no conflict with regulatory or warning signs

(d) minimal signs at intersections

(e) not a fixed object with high collision potential

(f) located outside the sight triangle

(g) no distracting messages, colours, displays, or lights.

For signs to be effective along arterial roadways, such as Carp Road or Dunning Road, signs must be spaced to account for the amount of time it takes to comprehend the sign message at any given road speed. Thus, the spacing should not be less than: 50m for 60 km/h and lower road speeds; 75m for 70 to 80 km/h and 100m for speeds of 90 km/h. Along arterial roads with a posted speed on 70km/h or greater, information signs are to be located 60 m minimum from the intersection, or at the start of the taper of turn lanes.

It became apparent that in developing a solution to address the way finding needs of rural businesses, the proliferation of signs, particularly those located at intersections [and thus creating traffic hazards] would require addressing, otherwise, the effectiveness of a directional signage program would be negated and the investment by the farm-based businesses wasted.

The review also highlighted the need to control what signage should be permitted in the rights-of-way such that the City-sanctioned signs, either for traffic control or for way finding, designed to be effective in maintaining a safe passage, continue to remain effective. Thus, appropriate levels of enforcement to address proliferation was considered to be crucial for ensuring the success of the recommended Directional Farm Signage Program.

The stakeholders provided many ideas with the resultant proposal representing a balance between ensuring the public rights-of-way remain safe for motorists, cyclists and pedestrians while providing opportunities to assist the farming community by relaxing existing restrictions and by introducing a new permitted sign.

It is noted that the establishment of the Directional Farm Signage Program is unique in the Province of Ontario and this reflects the fact that Ottawa has a large rural component compared to other cities and that the need for the City to support its rural constituency as well as its agricultural community is of utmost importance. This Program will elicit much interest once implemented.

Recommendation 1

The following changes are recommended to accommodate way finding needs of farm-based businesses and to assist the public in locating these operations where local landmarks or way finding guides do not exist or are infrequent:

· a new sign category for permanent signs in the right-of-way,

· a new sign category for permanent signs on private property,

· more flexibility for temporary farm accessory signs in the right-of-way, and

· more flexibility for temporary farm signs on private property.

Permanent directional signs in the right-of-way:

1. A new sign category specifically for the farm-based businesses, including farmers’/producers’ markets and agricultural fairgrounds, will be established in the Signs and Advertising Devices of City Roads By-law 2003-520, to accommodate the installation of directional signs in the right-of-way in rural areas. These signs will be called: Directional Farm Signs (DFS).

2. The requirements imposed by the Province for the TODS Signs (e.g., required barrier free facilities and parking lot capacity) that were adopted by Council will be relaxed for the DFS. Specifically, for the DFS, the farm-based businesses will be required to provide their farm business registration number pursuant to the Farm Registration and Farm Organizations Funding Act and confirmation that there is adequate off road parking to serve the customers visiting their sites. Farmers’/producers’ markets and agricultural fairgrounds will be required to provide documentation as to their non-profit status and confirmation that there is adequate off road parking to serve the customers visiting their sites.

3. The DFS will have a blue background with white reflective lettering with the City’s logo at the top, consistent with the City’s street name signs and existing directional signs. The reflective quality of the lettering and the City’s logo make the signs visible day and night. The City’s logo is an excellent marketing tool and communicates to all that the signs are City-sanctioned, thus discouraging the installation of illegal signs. The signs will be coated with an anti-graffiti finish to increase its lifespan and minimize the costs associated with vandalism (see Document 3 for example of City’s directional signage). Under normal conditions, these DFS last approximately 12 years.

At some point in the future, the DFS may include a “Made in Ottawa” branding logo that would promote locally grown produce and could replace the City of Ottawa logo. The branding logo, another initiative of the Rural Summit, is underway, and therefore the addition of the branding logo will be considered at a later date. The development and adoption of a branding logo will provide for opportunities to dovetail the DFS program with other branding initiatives and marketing activities promoting rural events and businesses (e.g. maps and brochures, events, tourism). As the signs are located in the right-of-way and as it is desirable to maintain the visual cue that the signs are a public service and are City-sanctioned, the branding logo, if added to the DFS, will reflect the City’s corporate identity.

Where there is more than one farm-based business along the same route, horizontal DFS will be installed on the same structure, exclusive of other types of destinations. Figure 7.2 in Document 3 provides an example of a horizontal DFS or consolidated group sign. Other destinations will be grouped on other structures. This allows for the possible installation of the “Made in Ottawa” branding logo on the DFS structure at a later date and will coincide with any marketing endeavours local farmers may undertake.

4. Where horizontal DFS are installed on the same structure, the first ‘tenant’ will be required to fund the structure and its installation on his/her own, unless the other ‘tenants’ (up to two) have been identified and are making arrangements for their installation at the same time. Where the first ‘tenant’ is alone and pays for the structure and installation, subsequent ‘tenants” of the structure will be required to pay their equal share of the structure and its installation to the first ‘tenant’ prior to being able to arrange for the manufacture and installation of their DFS panel. In essence, the first ‘tenant’ front ends the manufacture and installation of the structure. It is noted the City does not front end the installation of other signage available under the existing TPSSP as this would require tax generated funding to finance signage that benefits a third party.

As the implementation of the Program entails adopting a pro-active approach and soliciting all farm-based businesses to take advantage of this Program such that the installation of new DFS is coordinated, the occasions where a farm-based business may be required to front end the costs of a horizontal sign structure will be minimized and this process will only be necessary on an exception basis once the Program is fully implemented. Horizontal DFS are beneficial as the cost per farm-based business is reduced (cost sharing) and the number of signs in the right-of-way is minimized.

5. Farm-based businesses will be able to feature their corporate logo on the DFS and will be permitted to include up to two colours in their logo. This will enhance the way finding qualities of the directional signs as the familiarity of the business logo, as it is repeated on the DFS along the route, will be more readily recognized, thus simplifying the location of the destination. Colour must be restricted, however, otherwise the effectiveness of the sign, particularly its legibility, will be undermined and the sign, designed to provide direction and increase safety of the roadways will appear too much like advertising, which is not permitted in the right-of-way. (Refer to Figure 7.2 of Document 3 for an example of the DFS with a business logo).

6. Farm-based businesses will also be able to purchase and arrange for the installation of an additional panel at the base of an individual DFS that will permit them to slide in the following messages:

· Open for the season/Ouvert pour la saison,

· Closed/Fermé,

· The produce in season (e.g., corn, strawberries, etc) in both official languages or pictograms of the produce.

7. The DFS will be permitted within a 12 km radius of the farm-based business, in keeping with the intent of the Program. Some of the DFS signs will be permitted in urban areas where the farm-based business is located in the greenbelt or where signage from the provincial highways through an urban area is required to ensure the motorist is able to locate the farm-based business.

8. Farm-based businesses will have up until November 30, 2008 for transitioning to the DFS and removing their own signs in the right-of-way.

9. The TPSSP presently accommodates directional signs for the following destinations subject to meeting specific pre-requisites:

a. Casinos

b. Convention Centres

c. Museums

d. Performance Theatres

e. Public Art Galleries

f. Sports Parks and Leisure Centres.

Many have installed illegal signs at corners, etc. and have added to the proliferation of signs along rural roadways. It is an objective of the Program to address the proliferation of signs and to encourage the use of City-sanctioned signs instead. Thus, where signs have been installed without a permit in the right-of-way prior to January 1, 2006 by these qualified businesses they will have up until November 30, 2008 for transitioning to the City-sanctioned directional signage.

10. Signs that do not qualify as a DFS or under the TPSSP that were installed in the right-of-way prior to January 1, 2006 will have a grace period ending September 1, 2007. After this date, the business owner must remove non-approved signs. Signs that are not removed by July 1, 2007 will be removed without notice to the owner with removal costs invoiced to the owner of the signs.

11. Any signs installed in the right-of-way after January 1, 2006 that do not qualify as a DFS or under TPSSP shall be removed without notice to the owner with removal costs invoiced to the owner of the signs.

12. Although the locations of the DFS may be suggested by the farm-based business and the City will consider these, the final decision on the location of DFS will be determined by City staff based on traffic engineering practices and in the best interest of public safety.

13. The DFS Program will be operated on a cost recovery basis, although start up costs are being funded via the annual budget allotment in 2006, 2007 and 2008 for rural initiatives. The production and installation of DFS will be tendered to a private firm and costs will be determined through the award of tender in accordance with the City’s Purchasing By-law. Farm-based businesses will pay the one time direct cost for the manufacture, supply and installation of their signs based on the results of the tender. In addition, farm-based businesses will be required to pay a service fee of $75.00 per sign to cover traffic engineering costs to determine the location of each sign. The cost of administering the agreements and managing the contract award will be covered already through the allocation of a Coordinator position for the implementation phase, dealt separately in Recommendation 4.

14. Replacement of signs damaged by vehicles or vandalism will be the responsibility of the farm-based business. However, staff will forward any traffic accident reports involving these signs should any be forwarded by the Police to staff in the Public Works and Services Department for their consideration and action.

15. Farm-based businesses have a limited time span during which they can sell their produce. Thus, a DFS that has been damaged or vandalized is of particular concern, particularly as with maple syrup operators for example, where the selling season is very short and unpredictable. As part of the Program, the farm-based businesses will be able to obtain, at their cost, a temporary DFS on a stand (to be weighted down with sandbags), to be stored by the owner so that it can temporarily replace a DFS that has been damaged or knocked down. The contractor will then deliver the temporary DFS and sandbags to the farm-based business upon repairing or replacing the permanent DFS.

16. The permit will be valid for five years provided the farm-based business complies with the terms and conditions of the permit and any relevant by-laws. The renewal of the permit will be considered on the same basis.

17. The City’s Tourism and Public Services Signs Policy (TPSSP) is a policy administered by Public Works and Services. The policy provides guidelines and specifications for the installation of way finding signs in the rights-of-way within the City. The TPSSP will be amended to allow for the installation of DFS in the right-of-way. Copy of the TPSSP with the proposed amendments has been filed with the City Clerk.

Temporary signs in the right-of-way:

The current Signs and Advertising Devices on City Roads By-law 2003-520 imposes a number of restrictions on Farm Accessory signs (A-frames) to restrict proliferation and to minimize the safety hazards these may pose. The new Program proposes to:

§ reduce the setback from the pavement, where open ditches are a contiguous part of the road allowance, from 1 metre to 0.5 metre, as in many instances the space between the pavement and the ditch is less than 1 metre;

§ allow two additional Farm Accessory Signs, one to be located close to each intersection when approaching from either direction, to direct motorists to the presently permitted signs located within 500m from the farm produce outlet;

§ allow signs to remain for the duration of the sale of seasonal produce instead of monthly permit renewals;

§ allow signs to be secured and left overnight for the duration of the seasonal sale of the produce, subject to properly weighting the signs with sandbags; and

§ allow a larger, up to 2.23 m. sq. signs, to be located on the opposite side of the roadside ditch adjacent to the private property boundary, subject to the signs being secured.

Permanent signs on private property:

The Permanent Signs on Private Property By-law currently allows farm identification signs on the farm property only. The proposed changes will permit permanent signs to be installed off-premise on private property for the purpose of providing direction to the farm-based business. Accordingly, a new sign category namely, the “Directional Farm Sign” will be added to the By-law.

Consistent with the provisions of the Directional Farm Signs in the right-of-way, Directional Farm Signs on private property will be available to registered farm businesses only. A “registered farm” means a farm business that has obtained a business registration number pursuant to the provisions of the Farm Registration and Farm Organizations Funding Act. Both the farmers’/producers’ markets and agricultural fairgrounds must be non-profit organizations and provide documentation attesting to this.

Some of the by-law amendments to the Permanent Signs on Private Property By-law that will specifically assist farm-based businesses include:

§ An exemption of a DFS of less than 4 square metres from requiring a sign permit

§ Allowing DFS as far as a 12 km radius from the registered farm/ farmers’/producers’ markets or agricultural fairgrounds respectively

§ Allowing for only 1 metre setback from the property line (rather than requiring the sign to be located in farmer’s field and interfering with farming operations).

Any directional sign installed on private property by a farm-based business without a permit prior to January 1, 2006 that generally meets the by-law provisions will be permitted to remain until such time as the sign becomes structurally unsound, or is removed and/or replaced.

In all cases, the general provisions of the Permanent Signs on Private Property By-law will continue to apply for new and existing signs, e.g. limitations on illumination and the set back requirements from adjacent uses. In so doing, the general intent of the By-law, that is the concern regarding the installation of possible hazards and the discouragement of clustering and proliferation, continues to be respected.

Temporary signs on private property

Recommendation 2

The enforcement and removal of illegal signs in the right-of-way and on private property is key in ensuring the DFS Program is successful, as the continued presence of these will undermine the effectiveness of this Program and the investments by the farm-based businesses. An enforcement strategy is necessary to clear the roadsides to provide unencumbered views of the City-sanctioned signs and to provide uncluttered sight-lines at intersections. However, a phased enforcement program is recommended in order to provide businesses sufficient notice to remove the illegal signs and seek other means to advertise their products, service or business, and to assist farm-based businesses by providing time to phase out their non-approved signs and phase in the purchase of their DFS.

It is recommended that the enforcement of the following by-laws be undertaken by Community and Protective Services, By-law Services, in a phased approach during the two year implementation period of the Farm Directional Signage Program:

Signs and Advertising Devices on City Roads By-law 2004-520:

§ Signs erected in the right-of-way by a farm-based business for the purpose of directing the public to their operation or to advise of the crop availability during the applicable vending season, may remain in the right-of-way provided that these signs and structures are removed by November 30, 2008 and provided that prior to that date these signs and/or structures do not create a hazard in the right-of-way. Enforcement action will ensue with regard to these signs and/or structures if they are not removed by November 30, 2008 or if, at any time prior to that date, the signs and/or structures create a hazard in the right-of-way.

§ Signs erected in the right-of-way by those businesses who qualify for trailblazer signs under the TPSSP prior to January 1, 2006 for the purpose of directing the public to their operation, may remain in the right-of-way provided that these signs and structures are removed by November 30, 2008 and provided that prior to that date these signs and/or structures do not create a hazard in the right-of-way. Enforcement action will ensue with regard to these signs if they are not removed by November 30, 2008 or if, at any time prior to that date, the signs and/or structures create a hazard in the right-of-way.

§ All other signs that are unlawful and were erected in the right-of-way prior to January 1, 2006 may remain in the right-of-way provided that these signs and structures are removed by July 1, 2007 and provided these signs and/or structures do not create a hazard in the right-of-way prior to that date. Enforcement action will ensue with regard to these signs and/or structures if these are not removed by July 1, 2007 or if, at any time prior to that date, the signs and/or structures create a hazard in the right-of-way.

§ Any other sign that is unlawfully erected in the right-of-way after January 1, 2006 will not be tolerated and immediate enforcement action will be pursued with regard to these signs.

Permanent Signs on Private Property By-law 2005-439

Any directional sign installed prior to January 1, 2006 on private property by a farm-based business without a permit that generally meets the by-law provisions will be permitted to remain until such time as the sign becomes structurally unsound, or is removed and/or replaced.

Temporary Signs on Private Property By-law 2004-239

Any temporary signs installed on private property by a farm-based business for the purpose of directing the public to their operation or to advise of the crop availability during the applicable vending season, may remain in place provided that these signs are removed at the end of the vending season and are discontinued completely commencing November 30, 2008.

Recommendation 3

The introduction of the new sign category, the DFS, will result in a number of new signs in the right-of-way. These initiatives fall outside the standard principles of restricting signs in the right-of-way and therefore there is a degree of risk in introducing these new signs. It is not possible at this time to determine the full impact of:

a) allowing a number of new signs in the right-of-way;

b) whether allowing the Farm Accessory Signs (A-frames) to encroach within .5m of the edge of the paved roadway will be problematic;

c) whether allowing for these signs to be secured and left overnight in the right-of-way will create a hazard; or

d) whether the installation of larger temporary signs (maximum area of 2.23 sq. m.) to be installed on the opposite side of the ditch in the right-of-way, adjacent to private property will result in new hazards in the right-of-way and/or increased proliferation of illegal signage.

In addition, there is a concern that the combination of these measures may culminate in a saturation point beyond which safety in the right-of-way will be compromised. Thus, it is proposed that Public Works and Services, along with Community and Protective Services and Planning and Growth Management Departments, evaluate the impact of these changes and report back to Committee and Council any difficulties or concerns following the implementation period, or sooner, if problems develop. Based on the assessment results, further amendments to the sign by-laws may be brought forward for consideration. In addition, the assessment will serve to confirm whether on going resources, such as additional enforcement resources, are required to maintain the enforcement presence necessary to avert sign proliferation along the roadsides.

Recommendation 4

Additional temporary resources will be required to launch and coordinate this initiative, to oversee the removal of illegal signs in the right-of-way, to promote and administer the Directional Farm Signage Program, and more importantly, to ensure the effectiveness of this Program. Specifically, these resources are required to ensure the success of this high profile, Rural-Summit related initiative, including elements such as:

· communication and raising public awareness of the new Program and its objectives;

· identification of those businesses that qualify for directional signs, for grouping on one structure where possible (thus lowering the costs/sign for businesses and de-cluttering the right-of-way), and for securing their cooperation in removing their illegal signs from the right-of-way;

· enforcement required should sign owners fail to remove their illegal signs;

· ensuring the investment in the DFS by the farm-based businesses is not undermined by illegal signs as proliferation of signs will render the DFS ineffectual in providing direction;

· assessment of the overall implementation of the program and ongoing contract management;

· assessment of the impact of the new signs, including the loosening of restrictions for set backs in the right-of-way and permitting the temporary signs to be secured and left overnight in the right-of-way for the duration of the selling season.

The stakeholders clearly advocated that adequate resources be in place to deliver on the service paid for. Previous service delivery levels were considered as less than acceptable.

Currently, there are no resources in place to monitor this initiative and these temporary resources will evaluate the Program’s effectiveness and will identify any issues and problems that will be part of the report to be presented to Committee and Council at the end of 2008.

The following temporary FTEs are required:

Dept/Br	# of FTEs	2006 Compensation and incidental costs	2007 Compensation and incidental costs	2008 Compensation and incidental costs
PWS/TPO	.5	$38,000	$42,000	$42,000
CPS/By-Law Services	1.98	Nil	$60,000	$60,000
Total	2.48	$38,000	$102,000	$102,000

*Incidental costs: uniforms, workstation, IT, telephone, fleet/mileage, information packages and promotion, etc.

Recommendation 5

While the farm-based businesses will pay the one time direct cost for the manufacture, supply and installation of their signs, costs based on the result of the tender award, costs will be incurred by the City in determining, verifying and confirming the locations of each DFS approved pursuant to the provisions of the Signs and Advertising Devices on City Roads By-law 2003-520. Existing resources are such that these can only handle incidental requests for trailblazing signs, on an ‘as time permits’ basis, as the resources are dedicated to traffic control and signage activities. This initiative will create a high demand for the DFS and trailblazing signs with high expectations for a quick turnaround time, etc. The stakeholders clearly advocated that adequate resources be in place to deliver on the service paid for. Previous service delivery levels were considered as less than acceptable.

Accordingly, it is proposed that the farm-based businesses be required to pay a service fee of $75.00 per sign to defray these costs. Based on the estimated number of DFS to be installed (250), it is estimated that approximately $18,750 will be generated during the phased implementation.

CONSULTATION

A summary of comments is provided in Document 2.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Part year start up costs in the amount of $38,000 reflect the hiring of a temporary Coordinator position for the remainder of 2006 and for the one time costs of preparing the information packages for distribution and for marketing the Program to qualified businesses. The 2006 budget allocation to the Rural Affairs Office will offset these costs. Full implementation of the Program is slated to commence in 2007.

Thus, subject to Council approval, it is proposed that the Rural Affairs Office set aside funding in the amount of $102,000 each year from its annual budget allocation for 2007 and 2008 to cover the implementation costs. The proposed funding will provide for a dedicated resource to manage and coordinate the Program, will offset the cost of establishing a dedicated enforcement team through the hiring of additional summer students.

Based on the estimated number of DFS to be installed (250), it is estimated that approximately $18,750 will be generated during the phased implementation in the Public Works and Services, Traffic and Parking Operations revenue account, to be earmarked to offset the cost of verifying and approving the DFS within the rights-of-way.

The planned assessment of the Directional Farm Signs Program, to be undertaken at the end of 2008, will include a determination of whether there is a requirement for on-going costs, and should the assessment determine the requirement for new funding in the Community and Protective Services and/or Public Works and Services Departments, this will be identified in the report to Council scheduled for end of 2008 and as part of the 2009 budget proposal.

The tax increase forecast for 2007 as presented in the 2006 Draft Budget Summary document was projected to be 8.1%. The impact of this additional requirement in 2007, if approved as a commitment of the annual budget allocation of the Rural Affairs Office, will result in no tax increase. All additional requirements approved by Council that have a 2007 budget implication will be summarized and presented in the City’s Quarterly Status Report.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

Document 1:

§ A by-law of the City of Ottawa to amend By-law No. 2003-520 respecting temporary signs and advertising devices on City roads.

§ A by-law of the City of Ottawa to amend By-law 2005-439 respecting permanent signs on private property.

§ A by-law of the City of Ottawa to amend By-law No. 2004-239 respecting temporary signs on private property.

Document 2 – Summary of consultations

Document 3 - Graphic illustration of the Directional Farm Signs

Document 4 – Tourism and Public Services Signs Policy (on file with the City Clerk)

DISPOSITION

Corporate Services Department, Legal Services Branch, to prepare the by-law amendments for enactment by City Council.

Public Works and Services Department, Traffic and Parking Operations Branch, to prepare the amendments to the TPSSP.

City Manager, Rural Affairs Office, along with Public Works and Services, Traffic and Parking Operations and Community and Protective Services, By-law Services, to prepare a communications strategy and documentation to advise farm-based businesses of the Program.

Public Works and Services, Traffic and Parking Operations along with City Manager, Rural Affairs Office, to implement and coordinate the Directional Farm Sign Program, and undertake the assessment of the effectiveness of the Program.

Community and Protective Services Department, By-law Services to implement the enforcement program as noted in Recommendation 2.

A BY-LAW OF THE CITY OF OTTAWA TO AMEND BY-LAW

NO. 2003-520 DOCUMENT 1

BY-LAW NO. 2006-

A by-law of the City of Ottawa to amend By-law No. 2003-520 respecting signs and advertising devices on City roads.

The Council of the City of Ottawa enacts as follows:

1. Section 1 of By-law No. 2003-520 entitled “A by-law of the City of Ottawa to regulate signs and advertising devices on City roads”, as amended, is amended by adding the following definitions thereto:

“directional farm sign panel” means an off-premises sign that provides directions to a registered farm and the farm related products or services offered by the registered farm” or directions to a farmers’ market and the products offered at the site of the farmers’ market;

“directional farm sign system” means a wayfinding sign system of directional farms sign panels that is of standard design placed in locations approved by the City;

“farmers’ market” means a seasonal, multi-vendor operation at a fixed location selling agricultural, food and arts and crafts products including home-grown produce, home-made crafts and value–added products where the vendors are the primary producers;

registered farm” means a farming business that has obtained a farm business registration number pursuant to the provisions of the Farm Registration and Farm Organizations Funding Act, 1993, S.O. 1993, c. 21, as amended;

2. Section 1 of the said By-law No. 2003-520 is further amended by,

(a) repealing the definition of “farm accessory sign” and substituting the following definition therefor:

“farm accessory sign” means an A-frame or a rigid wayfinding sign to a registered farm that is constructed in a manner and of materials such that it can be placed or repositioned by an individual without mechanical aid;

(b) repealing the definition of General Manager and adding the following definition thereto;

“Deputy City Manager” means the Deputy City Manager of Public Works and Services or a designate; and

(c) adding the expression “, a directional farm sign system” after the expression “a homebuilders temporary wayfinding system” where it occurs in the definition of wayfinding sign system.

3. The said By-law No. 2003-520 is amended by striking out the expression “General Manager” wherever it occurs therein and substituting the expression “Deputy City Manager” therefor.

4. Section 9 of the said By-law No. 2003-520 is repealed and the following section is substituted therefor:

9. (1) No person shall place a farm accessory sign on a highway unless,

(a) no more than two (2) signs are placed for each approaching direction to a farm produce outlet with one (1) sign for each approach within five hundred metres (500m) of the entrance to or location of a farm produce outlet, and one (1) sign for each approach adjacent to the closest intersecting street;

(b) in the case of an A-frame sign, no sign is placed within one metre (1m) of the outside edge of the nearest vehicular travel lane or within fifty centimetres (50cm) of the outside edge of the nearest vehicular travel lane where a shoulder or open ditch is a contiguous part of the roadway;

(c) in the case of a rigid sign, no sign exceeds 2.23 square metres and no sign is placed within two metres (2m) of the outside edge of the nearest vehicular travel lane; and

(d) the sign is placed only during the hours of operation of the farm produce outlet.

(2) Despite paragraph (d) of subsection (1), a farm accessory sign may be permitted to be placed for the duration of the season in which the produce offered on the sign is sold if, in the opinion of the Deputy City Manager, the sign has been properly weighted or secured to prevent movement by the wind.

5. The said By-law No. 2003-520 is amended by adding the following heading and section immediately after Section 18:

DIRECTIONAL FARM SIGN SYSTEM

18A. (1) No person shall place a sign, which is part of a directional farm sign system on a highway unless,

(a) the location of the sign is within a 12 kilometre radius of the registered farm or farmers’ market to which the sign applies,

(b) the property adjacent to where the sign is to be located is zoned agricultural, general rural, rural-agricultural or marginal resource in the applicable zoning by-law of the old municipality or the location is otherwise approved by the Deputy City Manager, and

(2) The Deputy City Manager shall issue a permit provided that:

(a) the applicant has paid an administrative services fee of Seventy-five dollars ($75.00),

(b) the applicant provides such information as the Deputy City Manager may require including but not limited to the name and address of the applicant, name and address of the owner of the sign if it differs from the applicant, the farm business registration number, the location of the farmers’ market, if applicable, and the proposed location of the sign,

(c) the applicant enters into an agreement to indemnify and save harmless the City from all claims of liability that may occur as a result of farm directional farm system being placed on the highway,

(d) the applicant enters into an agreement with the City by which the applicant agrees that:

(i) the sign will be built to City Standards as contained in the Tourism and Public Service Signs Policy as approved by City Council on October 8, 2003,

(ii) the sign will be built with three (3) directional farm sign panels only one of which will be used by the applicant,

(iii) the two remaining directional farm sign panels will be made available to subsequent registered farm owners or a farmers’ market, upon request of such owners or farmers’ market,

(iv) the two subsequent registered farm owners or a farmers’ market may have panels constructed and placed at their cost provided that they obtain the written approval of the Deputy City Manager prior to placement of the panels, and

(v) the applicant will recover from each subsequent registered farm owner or farmers’ market no more than one third of the combined pro-rated cost of the construction and placement costs and any insurance costs.

(2) No person shall place a directional farm sign panel on a directional farm sign system without the approval of the Deputy City Manager.

(3) No person shall place a directional farm sign panel that is not part of a directional farm sign system on a highway.

(4) The permit described in subsection (1) shall be for a period of five years from the date of issuance.

ENACTED AND PASSED this day of 2006

CITY CLERK MAYOR

A BY-LAW OF THE CITY OF OTTAWA TO AMEND BY-LAW

NO. 2005-439

BY-LAW NO. 2006-

A by-law of the City of Ottawa to amend By-law No. 2005-439 respecting directional farm signs.

The Council of the City of Ottawa enacts as follows:

1. Section 1 of By-law No. 2005-439 entitled “A by-law of the City of Ottawa regulating permanent signs on private property”, as amended, is amended by adding the following definitions thereto:

“directional farm sign” means an off-premises ground sign that provides directions to a registered farm or the farm-related products or services offered by the registered farm or directions to a farmers’ market and the products offered at the site of the farmers’ market;

“farmers’ market” means a seasonal, multi-vendor operation at a fixed location selling agricultural, food and arts and crafts products including home-grown-produce, home-made crafts and value–added products where the vendors are the primary producers;

registered farm” means farming business that has obtained a farm business registration number pursuant to the provisions of the Farm Registration and Farm Organizations Funding Act, 1993, S.O. 1993, c. 21, as amended;

2. Subsection 59(1) of the said By-law No. 2005-439 is amended by,

(a) striking out the measurement 3m² where it occurs in clause (g) and substituting the measurement 4m² therefor;

(b) striking out the word “or” where it occurs at the end of clause (g);

(c) striking out the punctuation “.” where it occurs at the end of clause (h) and substituting the punctuation and word “; or” therefor; and

(d) adding the following clause immediately after clause (h):

(i) directional farm sign that does not exceed 4m².

3. Section 61 of the said By-law No. 2005-439 is amended by adding the expression “, farm directional sign” immediately after the expression “a street ad sign” wherever it occurs therein.

4. The said By-law No. 2005-439 is amended by striking out the title to Part 11 and substituting the following title therefor:

PART 11 – BILLBOARD SIGNS, STREET AD SIGNS AND DIRECTIONAL FARM SIGNS

4. The said By-law 2005-439 is amended by adding the following headings and Sections immediately after Section 186:

DIRECTIONAL FARM SIGNS

RULES APPLICABLE TO ALL DIRECTIONAL FARM SIGNS

186A. (1) A directional farm sign is permitted in District 4 and District 5.

(2) No owner of a directional farm sign shall fail to remove a directional farm sign from an off-premises location immediately after a registered farm or farmers’ market ceases to exist.

LOCATION AND POSITIONING RESTRICTIONS

186B. No person shall erect or cause to be erected a directional farm sign unless:

(a) it is located within a twelve (12) kilometre radius from the registered farm to which the sign applies;

(b) there is a minimum distance of 150 metres between directional farm signs;

(d) it has a minimum setback of one (1) metre from any property line; and

(e) it is located at least 30 metres from any other ground sign.

DISTRICT REGULATIONS

186C. In Table 32 of Section 186C,

(a) Column 1 sets out the aspect of the sign that is regulated;

(b) Column II sets out the regulation where the land use of the premises upon which the sign is located is residential;

(c) Column III sets out the regulation where the land use of the premises upon which the sign is located is institutional;

(d) Column IV sets out the regulation where the land use of the premises upon which the sign is located is other than residential or institutional; and

(e) “N/A” means not applicable as the sign is not permitted.

186D. No person shall erect or cause to be erected or maintain a directional farm sign in District 4 or District 5 unless it complies with Table 32 as follows:

	Table 32- Directional Farm Signs – District 4 and District 5
	I ASPECT REGULATED	II RESIDENTIAL	III INSTITUTIONAL	IV OTHER USES
i	Maximum area	N/A	N/A	4m²
ii	Maximum height	N/A	N/A	3 m
ii	Illumination	N/A	N/A	Not Permitted

ENACTED AND PASSED this day of , 2006

CITY CLERK MAYOR

A BY-LAW OF THE CITY OF OTTAWA TO AMEND BY-LAW

NO. 2004-239

BY-LAW NO. 2006-

A by-law of the City of Ottawa to amend By-law No. 2004-239 regulating the placement of temporary signs on private property.

The Council of the City of Ottawa enacts as follows:

1. Clause (e) of subsection 4(2) of By-law No. 2004-239 entitled “A by-law of the City of Ottawa regulating the placement of temporary signs”, as amended, is amended by striking out the expression “signs identifying” where it occurs at the beginning of the clause and substituting the expression “a poster sign, an A-Frame sign or a banner sign not exceeding 2.23 square metres (2.23m²) in area that identifies” therefor.

2. Section 4 of the said By-law No. 2004-239, is further amended by adding the following subsections immediately following subsection (3):

(3a) The temporary signs permitted in clause (e) of subsection (2) shall remain placed at a premise only for a period of time not exceeding the duration of the season for the sale of the farm produce.

(3b) No person shall place a temporary sign permitted in clause (e) of subsection (2) for a period of time that exceeds the duration of the season for the sale of the farm produce.

3. Section 6 of the said By-law No. 2004-239 is amended by adding the following subsection immediately following subsection (3):

(3a) Despite subsection (3), a temporary sign permitted in clause (e) of subsection 4(2) may be an off-premise sign.

ENACTED AND PASSED this day of , 2006.

CITY CLERK MAYOR

SUMMARY OF CONSULTATIONS DOCUMENT 2

A series of public meetings with the farm-based businesses were held between November 24, 2005 and June 11, 2006 to discuss concerns regarding the performance standards and by-law requirements regulating signs in the rights-of-way and on private property, and the need for way finding signage that would support the farm-based businesses by directing the public to their operations. Less formal meetings were also held with individuals and groups at times more convenient to their schedules.

The following is a summary of the issues and discussions:

November 24, 2005

Signs in the road allowance

· There is a conflict between farm signs and commercial signs at intersections

· Create “farmers only” sign program

· Accommodate year round farm products

· A definition of “Farm” is required

· The farm registration # should be the qualifying factor to qualify farm operations

· Currently put out as many as 15 signs

· Needs signs between 1^st of May and the end of harvest in December (for selling preserves) - 8 months

· Problem if signs are only permitted to be placed three months of the year

· Need signs within 5 km of operation

· Require 4 x 4 metal post

· For the farmer to accept standards, directional signs should be a consistent format throughout the City

· Consistent design and colour

· Should be permitted in the right-of-way

· Directional signs should be permanent signs

· Require the sign for 6 months plus/minus (June – October 31)

o Preferred 4 x 4’ or 4x2

o Post height is 6’.

o Prefer option to remove signs themselves

o Preferred location in ground within the road allowance

· Aware of safety concerns with signs on busy road - limit number of signs

· Directional signs required on secondary roads

· Support the idea of standard signs throughout the rural area

· Agricultural signs should be distinct from Community Signs and Business signs

· There is obvious favouritism toward real estate signs

· Preferable if the City contacted the farmer to request removal of sign rather than taking them to the yards. We would gladly remove them if not permitted

· Farmers Market – Need off site directional information. Example: Carp and March Road – Currently 25 market signs

· There is a need for an organized system of directional signs

· More than 1 sign should be allowed

· Need directional signs in urban area too, located adjacent to primary arterial roads.

· Need to include both rural and urban roads

· Need to know in the urban area where we are

· Should be able to advertise Fairs

· Should grandfather existing signs to reduce costs

· New farmers would then proceed with new system

· Signs within the ROW is a must – key to a simple practical solution

· Problematic that we don’t have a list of contacts to obtain info and approvals

· Need a system where the farmer can remove and replace signs for seasonal crops

· I need 16 signs x 3 seasons (16 per season – 3 seasons)

· Would prefer the post type similar to the City’s blue signs, 2 x 6’ best size

· Likes tourists signs – positive image for rural business

o Name

o Arrow

o Distance

o Product e.g. Sugarbush/strawberry

· Need a combination of the blue directional signs and temporary signs

· Clarify definition between right-of-way and road allowance

· Suggestion to place “Ontario logo” on top to give the signs a more official look – Finds this more attractive than the Ottawa logo

· “I disagree – I don’t want Ontario Logo if it means more $

· Will signs eventually be required in French and English? – This is problematic – understandable if it’s in the east end – not a current requirement in the west.

Tourism and Public Services Sign

· Expand the Province’s TODS program to local rural roads (trailblazer signs)

· As a member of Rural Summit – Agricultural Subcommittee, this was pointed out as a major concern (# 4 – priority)

· I qualify for TODS, but not enough room on existing signs – too full

· TODS sign are too expensive

· There is a need for a “trailblazer sign system” on rural roads – currently only on provincial highways

· Trailblazers signs are clean and uniform

· Farms need to be able to afford trailblazer signs

· Next choice – unique farm based sign system

· Experiencing a problem getting blue signs maintained – replaced during/after road construction work

Temporary Signs in the road allowance.

· Need a common sense approach

· Need to look at feasibility of permitting temporary and directional signs

· Preferable to go to local works garage for permits as we used to

· A longer permit term is required

· Make sure the permit application is short

· Application process needs to be short and sweet – to the point

· Application should be available from many sources:

o Web

o Client Service Centres

· If set back there is no safety hazard

· Height and weight need to be realistic if engineering is required

· We keep them off the shoulder but need to avoid placing them in the ditch

· Permits should be based on one per farm business

· Permits should not be based on the farm location

· Need “A” Frame signs and signs on electrical posts

· Need to look at feasibility of permitting temporary and directional signs within the equivalent of the inner blvd., much like in urban areas

· Problematic that we don’t have a list of contacts. Contacts for temp sign permits are Key – Vital!

· Need signs for three seasons:

o Sugar Bush

o Strawberries

o Pumpkins

o Etc.

· “A” Frame signs needed for approx 5 months of the year

· Concerned with sufficient time for “in season” temp signs

· Concerned about size - wants to keep current size

· Should be allowed in right-of-way

· Currently locks signs with chains as each sign costs $300.00

Temporary Signs on Private Property

· No specific concerns were expressed or options put forward to install temporary signs on private property.

Permanent Signs on Private Property

· Need a minimum of 6 x 6’ all on private property

· Require 12’ high – clears line of sight - Less than 4’ not helpful

· Should be not less than ½ sheet of plywood on private property

· 2 Permanent Signs required on site to identify Farm

· Directional signs on private property – in rural – in crop Areas – poses difficult for the farmer – hefty rent – neighbour’s private property not always made available

Meeting January 18, 2006

The few complaints received about our signs shouldn’t drive the policy on whether multiple signs are considered proliferation.

Temporary signs should not be limited to a specific timeframe as my Sugar Bush signs are required in February.

All participants were requested to provide an inventory list of their existing signs and locations where signs are placed annually.

My TOD signs on Innes Road have been taken down for road construction and temporary signs should be put in their place until construction is complete.

Response: TPO committed to ensure the signs would be installed in the interim.

There is a concern about combining signs. He felt there should be a separate sign just for the agricultural community.

Agricultural signs should be a different color, i.e., other than blue so as not to be confused with traffic related signs. The agricultural signs would eventually be enhanced with the rural logo currently under development.

Signs should be grouped by land use e.g. Farm Signs, Community Signs, Business signs.

There was a consensus that the panels on the sign should be flexible to allow the farming operator to interchange a section to indicate OPEN/CLOSED or date range of seasonal produce, etc.

Would it be feasible to outsource installation of the signs to keep the costs down? He was concerned that, with City resources, installation of the signs would not be responsive to their needs.

A concern was expressed regarding future maintenance, in terms of ensuring the signs are put out in time for each seasonal crop. Participants questioned whether the farm-based businesses could manage the removable section of their own panel.

Farm-based businesses located close to the urban areas need way-finding signs.

Response: Unlike the rural areas, in the urban setting there are visible indicators to direct the public. However, there will be some cases where the signs could be located in an urban area to direct the motorist from the highway through the urban area to the rural area. There are also some farm-based businesses located in the Greenbelt and some signage to these locations may be considered.

There is unfair competition from the large developer signs permitted in the road allowance.

We require a sufficient number of signs to get the public to their operation.

A request to be exempted from the bilingual policy, i.e. to choose whether to identify/advertise in English, French or both.

Response: The farm-based business’ corporate name/logo is acceptable, as is. That is, the corporate name/logo should appear in the language it was registered as. However, the information on the remainder of the sign face must be in both official languages or in universal symbols as the signs are located in the public right-of-way.

Don’t use the term TOD signs to identify directional farm signs. The farm-based businesses are offended having been excluded due to the excessive fee for these signs.

A concern that the cost of the way finding sign system would be more expensive than the cost to produce and manage their existing temporary signs.

Participants reinforced the need for a new category of “off-premises” sign on private property for farming operations, at scale equal to 4’x 8’.

Staff noted that there was a strong case for farm operator way finding signs on the scenic routes identified in the Official Plan Transportation Plan.

The suggested 1 metre setback from the pavement for temporary signs would not work because the space between the pavement and the ditch is less than 1 metre.

Change the regulation requiring temporary signs to be removed every night.

Response: Consideration may be given to permitting the signs if they are weighted down to prevent movement by wind.

Why can we not install larger “A” frame signs?

Response: A-frames (Farm Accessory Signs) are restricted in size to mitigate the potential for these to become a hazard in the roadway. The program will be reviewed after 2 years at which time, based on usage, there may be adjustments.

The directional sign program needs to be flexibility enough to accommodate rural businesses.

Response: The type of businesses permitted on the sign will be limited during the trial period. However, this would be the type of issue to be considered when the program is evaluated.

Consider extending the transition period from our existing temporary signs to the new City signs?

Response: A 2+ year period is considered sufficient to clean up signs that don’t qualify and give farm based businesses a reasonable amount of time to phase out their existing temporary signs.

There is a concern that the number of signs on the public rights-of-way will be limited. Other businesses will want equal opportunity on the new sign system thus take up the available space.

Response: Phase II of this project will be looking at accommodating Community signs that would display generic directional information e.g. Food, Fuel, Accommodation, etc. Individual directional signs appropriately spaced to convey the message to the public that they are on route to their destination might also be considered.

Farm operations are in crisis. We would prefer to have the existing signs grandfathered? Where there are multiple signs on private property, which gets to stay?

Response: We will consider allowing existing signs on private property to remain in place as long as these are structurally safe and generally comply with the by-law requirements.

What about existing signs that are oversized?

Response: Staff will consider these signs in the development of the program.

A provision is required to measure the height of a sign starting at the road height rather than the grade height at the base of the sign.

Response: This concern is noted and will be accommodated within provisions developed.

Would like a centralized contact for all issues related to signs.

Response: This issue was identified during the Summit. 311 is a centralized number for all inquiries to the City and the Call centre staff will refer you to the correct department.

Meeting - February 27, 2006

A-Frame Temporary Signs

The size of A-frames will remain as per the by-law – 2 x 3 due to proximity to the paved portion of the roadway (now .5 m) and, with simple weighting to secure the signs, to maintain a low risk of shifting from weather conditions.

Q: Could the ability to make use of these signs be limited to farm-based businesses with a farm registration number – to prevent “dealers” from encroaching into their market? It has been found that when these dealers set up along the road and sell older produce, the buyers are not satisfied with the quality of the product and assume that all farm gate sites sell stale or old produce, which is not the case for farm operations.

A: This was not pursued as it would be difficult to implement and enforce as the A-frames are not subject to permit requirements and the method of identification (eg., Farm registration number on signs) cannot be verified in the field, etc.

Supplementary note: Marketing efforts to promote farm-based businesses are a way to distinguish farm operations from dealers. Perhaps affixing the farm registration number to the A-frames as a means of identifying the status of the operation would be effective.

Q: It is requested that consideration be given for larger (4 x 6) temporary signs that are chained or tied to poles and are located on the other side of the ditch or in the median while the vending is underway. These signs are secured to prevent them from being stolen and are removed once the operation at the roadside is shut down, for eg., after the strawberries are done or after the corn sales are done.

A: Staff agreed to consider this.

Directional Farm Signs (in the right-of-way)

Consider grandfathering existing farm-based businesses inside greenbelt.

Response: It was agreed that the development of the distinct upper logo would be undertaken by a group that is developing branding of “Made in Ottawa produce and products” with Economic Development and Strategic Projects Branch as lead.

Consider use of corporate logos, colours included, for the vertical trail blazing sign. Cost issues to be considered.

Consider area at bottom of the signs to accommodate “Open and Closed” blades to be slipped in and out by the farm-based business. It was suggested that Open tends to be misunderstood as the sign stays in place the entire season and people have assumed the sign relates to hours of operation rather than the duration of the season. The message needs to state: “Open for the season”. This is an issue in view of the City’s bilingualism policy and the fact the signs will be in the City’s rights-of-way. Could the spots be made available and it is up to the farm-based businesses to use or not and perhaps the farm-based businesses would not be subject to the policy?

Response: It has been determined that due to the location of the sign and the fact the signs are part of a City-sanctioned program, the text on the signs must be in both official languages. The translation of “Open for the Season” translates to: Open for the Season/Ouvert pour la saison” which may exceed the available blade size of .44 m x 1.8m in size, and thus require a reduction in the size of text reducing readability. “Closed /Fermé” can easily fit the area. Alternatively, a sign blade depicting the universal symbol for the crop that is in season could be used for this space instead.

It was agreed that 12 km radius was an appropriate.

Concern was expressed with adopting the requirement that signs must be in the rural area only as signs directing customers to some of the farm-based businesses were once in the rural area and now are being engulfed due to the urbanization of the area. The presence of these signs at the existing locations are necessary to guide customers from previous years who are confused by the encroaching development and need the assurance they are on the right path. Consider allowing the signs to remain for a time to assist customers find their bearings. It was agreed that with a 5-year term for the permits, that this would permit signs to stay in place despite the encroachment of development and after 5 years it is timely to revisit the locations and adjust accordingly.

It was confirmed that the signs are treated to repel graffiti.

There is concern that the DFS, paid for by the farm-based business, may be damaged or vandalized either by the snow plow or other parties, eg., a motor vehicle accident.

Response: The Province’s TODs system charges an annual maintenance fee to cover damaged signs, and this approach could be adopted (the group indicated their preference to pay as you go, that is, to pay to replace signs as required rather than paying an annual fee). Staff will discuss the concern with regards to damages by any road maintenance activities with PWS and noted that the location of the DFS are determined such that the signs are not at risk, rather the signs, if damaged, will be due to a motor vehicle accident and in this case, PWS receives the traffic accident reports from the Police and if the responsible party is identified, they can be pursued for compensation.

Construction issues: The group has asked for better treatment by road reconstruction of the way-finding signs.

Response: Staff will raise this issue with the Branch that oversees the contracts for rehabilitating the City’s infrastructure, perhaps to amend the awards to include stronger obligations on contractors to install and maintain temporary signage at locations determined by staff.

Administrative Procedure

Applications to include:

Applicant name, property address, mailing address, farm registration number, parking availability, proposed location of signs (well described for ease of locating), proposed sign content, number and type of signs required.

Duration of registration or permit – 5 years

Consider two performance standards – i.e. replacement standards: first for response during season where turnaround time is crucial and second for off-season.

It was suggested that to address the urgency of replacing a downed sign, farm-based businesses will have the option to purchase an extra sign attached to a post and temporary base and the contractor could place the sign out while a new sign was being manufactured and finally re-installed.

The group supports a ‘pay as you go’ principle for paying for the signs rather than paying an annual fee to cover maintenance and repairs (as with the Province’s TODS system) + the cost of the sign and installation.

Contract details to include:

Scope of work
Type of signs
Performance Standards: detailing expectations for maintenance

installation standards, contact service number

Permanent Signs on Private Property

The setback from the road and intersection for signs on private property is too stringent and would result in the sign being in a farmer’s field, which would interfere with crop management and harvesting. Consider permitting the signs to be as close as possible to the fence/lot line but inside the private property.

Other Issues

Ensure that Farmers’ Markets are included in the farm-based business sign group. It was confirmed that the Farmers’ Markets are already a qualified category under the way finding signs program.

Supplementary note: Farmer’s/Producers’ Markets and Agricultural fairgrounds have been included in the proposal.

Meeting - May 1, 16 and June 5, 2006

Can the farm operators be on both the TOD’s signs and the FDS program?

Response: Yes.

The majority of participants supported the blue background rather than the green. Participants were asked to provide their feedback on the comment sheets provided.

The participant’s preferred the Ottawa logo rather than the farm branding logo or a combination of both. It was felt the City logo added credibility and consistency.

Some of the existing sign installed by the City were required to be bilingual. What is the policy?

Response: Following discussion with Legal Services, the City position for the FDS signs is that the business name should appear in the language the business name was registered. Other public information on the sign would be in French and English e.g. OPEN/OUVERT.

Farm-based business’ logos will be restricted to two colors (in addition to white).

As an aid for the public, it is important to include the kilometre distance and directional arrow on the signs.

What about larger temporary signs? Can these be located on the inner boulevard or on the other side of the ditches secured to posts?

Response: Larger 4’x6’(2.23 sq. m.) temporary signs will be considered for the implementation period given some farm-based businesses have invested in these.

Seasonal signs will be permitted for the duration on the produce season.

What about banner signs on private property?

Response: These will be considered as well.

Can we restrict the successful contractor to local businesses?

Response: It must be an open tender process, but the successful candidate will need to fulfill the obligation of the contract.

What is proposed is wonderful, including clearing the road allowance of all illegal signs! I am tired of being told to take out my sign that is only in the road allowance during the strawberry picking season, as soon as I install it, when there are a number of signs nearby that have been there since last fall and have benefited from being in place for almost a year!

GRAPHIC ILLUSTATION OF THE DIRECTIONAL FARM SIGNS DOCUMENT 3

[1] A right-of-way is the technical name for road allowance. Generally the right-of-way/road allowance is the band of land between the property lines of private properties that has been set aside by the government for the use and access by the public for the purpose of travel.

2. DIRECTIONAL FARM SIGNAGE PROGRAM

PROGRAMME SUR LES PANNEAUX INDICATEURS EN MILIEU RURAL

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS AS AMENDED

Documentation

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Table 32- Directional Farm Signs – District 4 and District 5

November 24, 2005

Meeting January 18, 2006

Meeting - February 27, 2006

A-Frame Temporary Signs

Directional Farm Signs (in the right-of-way)

Other Issues

Supplementary note: Farmer’s/Producers’ Markets and Agricultural fairgrounds have been included in the proposal.