HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BZA-1975-09-08 °
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, CITY OF ITHACA
CITY HALL, ITHACA, NEW YORK
SEPTEMBER 8, 1975
A regular meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeals, City of
Ithaca, was held in Common Council Chambers, City Hall, Ithaca,
New York, on September 8, 1975.
PRESENT: Peter Martin, Chairman
C. Murray Van Marter
Gregory Kasprzak
Elva Holman
Edgar Gasteiger
Edison Jones, Dep. Bldg. Comm. and
Secretary
Chris Smith, Recording Secretary
ABSENT: John Bodine
Chairman Martin opened the meeting listing members of the Board
present. The Board operates under the provisions of the City
Charter of the City of Ithaca and under the provisions of the
Zoning Ordinances. The Board shall not be bound by strict rules
of evidence in the conduct of the hearing, but the determination
shall be founded upon sufficient legal evidence to sustain the
same. The Board requested that all participants identify them-
selves as to name and address and confine their discussions to
the pertinent facts of the case under consideration.
Edison Jones announced the first case to be heard.
APPEAL NO. 9-2-75: Appeal of William Zikakis to Section 6-B-3
of Sign Ordinance of City of Ithaca at 381
Elmira Road in a B-5 district.
MR. ZIKAKIS: Gentlemen, it' s a very simple case. We've opened
up an import store as you may be aware of, we bought the Tompkins
Supply Building and we are doing extensive remodeling. By that,
we are remodeling the inside and we plan to face lift the outside.
I've had architects work on it and now I have an interior decorator
working on it which we are making better progress. We think that
certainly probably it is one of the biggest eyesores on the Elmira
JRoad now and I think that the improvements that we will make will
be impressive to you and that it will certainly help the Elmira
Road at least our end of it. It will help it substantially. Whati
we need is identification for the product that we are handling.
i 2
We are handling three lines of automobiles and we have no identifi—
cation whatsoever. When you so graciously approved our Chevrolet
sign my identification for Volvo was on that same pylon and when
that went down all my identification went down which we were
delighted and I think that our sign made a big improvement in the
area. What we would like to do is have approval to put up an
import sign bearing the names of the three products represented
plus my own name as identification of who is selling the product.
We brought it before the Planning Board and the Planning Board
has agreed to the design and in fact they made a change. They
didn't like the first design and we agreed to alter it and we made
a change on it. I don't know, did they give you a copy of it.
This is a little more up to date version of what we have and I
will submit it over here.
MR. MARTIN: Can we keep this as part of the evidence?
MR. ZIKAKIS: Ok, the only thing that I've discovered is that
you don't give things back. Like my pictures in the last case. I
sort of need it, will it come back to me? If you need it you're
welcome to it but I'm still working with the sign designer on it.
MR. MARTIN: Why don't we pass this around and we can each note
the extent to which it varies from what we already have.
MR. ZIKAKIS: It' s basically the same, except the recommendation
of the Planning Board was that I enclose the Masda sign.
MR. MARTIN: Within the frame.
MR. ZIKAKIS: Within a frame, right. The Masda sign is like a
lollipop as their preference but they said they will go with
anything that the recommendation is. They will allow us some
flexibility on changine that. The size is not exact. We requested
a variance I don't rember the square feet, perhaps Ed, you do?
MR. JONES: 162
MR. MARTIN: The ordinance permits you 50, right?
MR. JONES: Right.
MR. ZIKAKIS: That is a little smaller. That shows, and I don't
know where he got his dimensions, he came up with 8 foot and that
f i
3
is one of the things that I have to discuss with him because
actually the signs are all 10 foot wide which brings it up to
that standard that we originally requested. So, that is not a
true representation other than we think appearance will hold in that.
MR. GASTEIGER: So, it will be 10 x whatever this. . . . . . . .
MR. ZIKAKIS: Yes, Which I think is like 18 when you add the name
on it. Before we didn't have the name added on it. We were
thinking at that time of putting the name on the building, but
the Planning Board requested that everything to on the sign itself.
MR. GASTEIGER: The 162 square feet are with the 10 foot width?
{ MR. ZIKAKIS: Yes. It would actually be 180.
MR. MARTIN: I have two questions. First as I recall, the prior
, case in which we gave you a variance for the main building, we
took account of the fact that there were non-conforming signs
in excess of what the ordinance permitted, that would have to
come down after the period of time allowed for non-conforming
signs and we imposed that time limitation on the variance. Would
• you have any objections to the same being done here?
MR. ZIKAKIS: No. I imagine if the one came down that the other
would have to come down, and I'd probably come down with it. But,
we would agree to whatever we agreed to last time, I'm certainly
sure, would be alright.
MR. MARTIN: The second thing is perhaps a bit more difficult. We
are not charged to grant variances anytime we think people are
good citizens and its a good idea. We have to find that there is
something impractical, unreasonable and possible in the require-
ments of the ordinance as it applies to this property. Could you
explain to us why we might reasonably find that about your case.
MR. ZIKAKIS: I think that the big reason is that we have unlike
but that is .not really true. I was going to say like on most
I
dealership but that is not the case in Ithaca. Most dealerships
are dual or tripled up and this is the case where we are represent-I
ing three lines and if I had just for example volvo in that build-
ing which cannot support that building by itself, I could manage
i
4
to stay in that 50 foot limit, that would be no problem but I
can't support the building with just one import line. It takes
the three lines to do the job and I need the identification for
the three franchises. It really is a hardship without it. We
are advertising heavily now, to try to identify the building but
people really don't know where it is at. Fortunately they tie
it in with the Chevrolet and they will come into the Chevrolet
and we will refer them over across the street. But it is a hard-
ship not having the identification.
MR. MARTIN: Are there questions from members of the Board?
MR. GASTEIGER: Yes, I'm sort of curious about what the Planning
Board might have said, in terms again of new rules and regulations
for the Elmira Road area. I 'd like to know if you have heard
anything about this, are there any rough guides and whether this
was an easy thing with them to except. It would be curious to know
what the thinking is and this is reoccurring now and . . . . . . . . . . . . .
MR. ZIKAKIS: It seemed rather easy, I don't mean to second guess
them but they of course have come out and looked over the location
and where we would put it we also adhere to their changes grace-
fully and it appeared as if they were leaning more now, that
the new zoning, the B-5 zoning is there that they were looking
at it as perhaps there is a need on something that' s on a more of
a traffic area for that particular area. Again, I don't mean to
try to express their sentiments but they seemed in sympathy with
our problem.
MR. MARTIN: In another recent case on the Elmira Road, this Board
was unable to act because of inaction of the Planning Board but th
City Council in effect allowed a non-conforming sign to go up
sort of on a interim basis pending the enactment of some new
sign provisions of the Elmira Road. Would you have any objections
to a condition being attached to a variance which would say in
the event that there are amended sign requirements that come into
effect for the Elmira Road that your sign would have to comply.
MR. ZIKAKIS: No, I feel that I would agree with that if it
I� 5
1
I
certainly, if they could live by it, I certainly could too.
IMR. GASTEIGER: What is the area of this sign compared to the
othersign. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
MR. ZIKAKIS: It would set back further. We are not asking, for a
variance forward till we feel that we can comply with everything
but size. Actually, the property I think that you will find
• being a corner location is entitled unless I 'm mistaken, is
f
entitled to 50 square foot twice. One for each corner. So, I
don't plan to have a one sign, again unless I'm mistaken I think
I'm entitled to 100 square foot. So, I'm not asking for that
much more except that it would be all in one and it would be
towards the front of the building closer to the building whereas
j the Chevrolet sign sits pretty far out.
I MR. GASTEIGER: I brought these from home to see what the area
i
was on the Chevrolet sign. Do you remember what that area was?
MR. ZIKAKIS: 250 I 'm guessing 250 square foot or something like
that. Incidentially, I hope that you have driven by that because
it certainly is a tremendous improvement; from what was there.
I hope you have seen it, it' s actually enhanced the property and
it is a clean looking sign and I hope to do the same thing here.
One thing that is interesting here is that all the colors are
blue and white so you won't have a hodgepodge of different colors
all clashing together. All their identification colors are blue
and white. it ties in with Chevrolet which is blue and white.
MR. MARTIN: Any further questions?
MR. GASTEIGER: What brought this up in my mind is to what the
thinking of the Planning Board, but I think that you have made a
different pitch than this. I wish I could have found your previous,
one using a need for identification of three franchises on a
faster traffic area. I don't think that was used as an arguement
before?
EMR. VANMARTER: The approach from the south is through that
i underpass and it is the same. The visibility of Chevy as you
6
approach from the south is not quite as good as this which is a
backed up intersection.
MR. GASTEIGER: The reason I brought this up is that that was
a matter of visibility and nothing was said about the speed of
traffic. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
MR. ZIKAKIS: The speed limit is 30 mph, which is a city speed
limit but you are coming in off of a 40 or 50 mile zone and I'll
tellyouu it would be hard for us to find anybody going 30 by the
time they hit our place. The other is that the place, you see
since we are remodeling the facility and it was Tompkins Supply
for 15 years, it is identified as that and we still have people
to sell wholesale plumbing to if I had any. They still come in
and wonder where they go to pick up that pipe.
MR. KASPRZAK: Would it be very difficult for you to retain the
size suggested on this? . . . . . . . . .
MR. ZIKAKIS: Yes sir, because the corporations, we have to buy
their signs if we use any signs at all. All the sizes are 10
foot. Frankly when Arnold Meyer Sign Company made this up the
last time, the only thing that I could imaging is that they were
trying to get me to manufacture the signs, which I have a problem
with the corporation plus it is probably double the expense if
I have the manufacture verses buying them ready made from the
individual corporations. From the distributorships the car
distributorships. But they are 10 and 10 and I think the Masda
was 13 and that is where we ran into a little problem and they
had the Masda on the outside of the original sketch. And then we
had to encase it and do some artistic work I imagine the sign
company will, to make it fit properly.
MRS. HOLMAN: But that is possible?
MR. ZIKAKIS: Yes, we planned to encase it all. We might have to
add a little stuffing or something the others might be a little
more suspended and not fit as neatly or else it will be shaped
down.
i' 7
i
MR. MARTIN: Any further questions? For the record I 'll ask if
anyone else wishes to be heard in this case, hearing none, than
that concludes the public portion of our hearing this evening.
i
8
,
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
CITY OF ITHACA
SEPTEMBER 8, 1975
,
EXECUTIVE SESSION
APPEAL NO. 9-2-75
Mr. Gasteiger: I move the variance be granted That he be
allowed to put up a single sign of no more than 180 square feet
with the conditions :
1) That no sign be placed on the building on either Spencer
Street or Elmira Road.
2) That no pylon sign is placed on Spencer Street.
3) That his signs adhere to the sign ordinance in 1979.
Mr. Kasprzak: I second that.
FINDINGS OF FACTS
1) That a problem exists for the property owner in terms of
presenting the product lines that he has committed himself to.
2) The Ordinance permits a total square footage of sign pylon
and on the building of approximately 245 square feet at this
location, so that the proposed variance with conditions
results in less square footage of sign than the total allowed
by the Ordinance.
3) Since the property is in a faster traffic area, the larger
pylon sign would appear to be justified.
4) That conditions 1 and 2 above, lends itself to a distinct
improvement of the area.
VOTE: Yes - 4 No - 1
Application has been granted.
9
C E R T I F I C A T I O N
I , CHRISTINE SMITH, DO CERTIFY that I took the minutes of the
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, City of Ithaca, in the matters of Appeal
9-2-75 on September 8, 1975, at City Hall, City of Ithaca, New
York, that I have transcribed same, and the foregoing is a true
copy of the transcript of the minutes of the meeting and the
Executive Session of the Board of Zoning Appeals, City of Ithaca,
on the above date, and the whole thereof to the best of my ability
Christine Smith
Recording Secretary
Sworn to before me this
�Wday of ��, 1975.
ota y c
MOLLY J. W. BEARDSLEY
Notary- PL16HC :iof New York
Qualificcl in `iun;1kins County
Tcrin Llnir;, March 30, 19