Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BZA-1968-11-04 r I BCS 0? ZCWMO APPBAIS, MY Or ITBACxA, CTrr MMO BAR qhs 1966 PRBMTi RALPH P. BA=.l iOVERLY NARM ion Fl>WxMit I UMM R. P>?AMA, J. f Za the absonoo of SIGH W WWOCt, Chairman of Board of ZonAmt,Ampolso II { Cit© of Via, It was mved by John Bor*kowid and sosded b;r Dowerly, �i lin, that ChoMoy WUV*r be soleotod as ASUDS 0161100n. I I� TM C UIR: This is a day advertised pab►lio nesting of the Hoard of { Zoning Appeals, The s> o" POSSatll"IdeS Woolf are Ralph StIdInIq Beverly Mart n, John Boatkowelds Osorrgo Pfasn, and Bwildiag Cosslssift"t Q. l!ls>aRm flan ar .ter. i, We are short one member$ whish sssno that for an appeal to be gsw*Aodo the appellant needs few out of flare members Toting afflxrnatiw+ely. We have two oases to hear tonight sad if either or bethh of the appolIo0a parofirrrs to postpOnt their appesl,s, they may do soy. I {I kwWor in asOtiv* frog two appellants TER CRAIRs The first ease is robes 6126 the Appeal. of C;arrell*$ WANO i woe, DWorporated, 233 BLrLra Read, Itha"s New YOA4 for a special permit under S*Msn ?p Oolumn 4, std SOMA" $A-,U .for sign at 233 11m ra Rye! in B-4 distviot* As YM take the floes to tostlty, WORM you ASOM gins yortrr now am aft"ss for the stremagraoter. me is has far Omre No, 81ft IV* Ou"ut wnw W. awou a NY harms Address is IM Ossoo dills 3u"t. l is what� we are req g, hero on the table 3n f"rro", for a sign. � (DWIeates a paint of proposed slim) And boyo is the oert$Aost len of srrrSAIM. Thyro is the now of erre► deoeasod thore sad so I oo dd not deliver that letter. And here is a shoot I Sot bask todayg, vftoh shows the three slims A eh will be roplaood, an old roost' 4gn, our nome ever the deer and a Coppot Tie. oral sign. These All be rerplas d with the doWoU pole sign you so* theme. t Appellant*& Exhibit* 1 and 2 marked for identitteations Exhibit 1 being a pisture of the three signer to be replaoeds and Mbit 2 being a sketdh of tbo proposed sign Appellant *plains Exhibit$ to Bears! MR. CAAROLLs This includes the lettering on the building* Four Signs s plus the tottering represents 232 square foot# The old ods. siau is roughly 32 square foot on top of the building, The Cooper 'Tire sign is about 14 square torts ash our the door is 'about 2 or 3 square feet* Tbaose ata to be mploced by signs totalling 232 squaw foot* THE CHAIRS The exhibits are rooeived, Heir far does the sign set from that right of way? Mo CARROLLs Approximately 16 feet from the lot linel that *role%** to the ground sigap wbioh is a comp1eu of th"o THE CRAM to thearo away one here appearing on behalf of this appeal? Nome In there any one have opposed to this appeal.? (lone. Thank your Mr. Carroll. #0300 THE CHAIRt The next easeis Number $130, the Appeal of Ithaca Bast Beof, Incorporated# 205 South Moadoer'Stroot„ Ithaca# New York, for an exception to sign sire under the provisions of Section 7p Column 4, at 203 South Meadow Street, Ina, 8•2 district Who to app"rint? JAMES J. CLYNES, JR. I an appearing for the Appellant in this case, We would offer first and ask that it be resolved in evidence# the Affidavit of Moiling to property owners* Appellant's Exhibit I marltod for identification THE CHAIRt Received, Appellant's Exhibits 2 and 3 marked for identification MR. CLYNESt Appellant$* Exhibit 2 shows the layout of the signs and the dimensions of the signs as they are proposed to bre placed on the building, This is actually the subject matter of the hearing, Appellant's Exhibit 3 will be a series of ton photographs# sharing the building with the signs or*atot on them, and with the signs being blocked out„ as shown from various distances and areas* I will *ell Vincent Giordano, VINCENT GIS„ having first been duly sworn, answered as follorst BY MR. CLYNES t Q, I show ,you Appellant's Exhibit 3, marked for identification, and with particular reference to the signs on the building here on Kentucky Beefy at my request have you investigated as to hour these signs would be of- fixed to the building? A. Yos, Q, Could you describe to the board how they are affixed? A, A shoot metal oatnapq rojects *#veer the sidewalk approximately five fact and slopes up at a 43 angle, and the words, "Kentucky Beef" acre bolted into a booking plate. Y�Y Q. You are in the gonoral contracting business here in the City of Ithaca? A, Yrs, • Q. Aro you familiar with this typo of work? A. Yoe,, Q. In your opinion is this sign or Signa, a part of that building? A. Yos, Q And you are the owner of the property that bases this particular estab- lisbamat two the Ithaca Roast Beef, Incorporated? At Yea. Q, And the affidavit which was submitted and roaeived in evidence, you holped to prepare? A. Yes, Q. Aro any of those people here this evening? A, Nor BY holt, CLYNESe That is all I have of Mir, Giordano, Call Mrs Martin# FREDERICK MARTIN, having first born duly sworn, an- swerod as follows: SY MR. CLYNRSs Q, Mr. Martin, are you an officer of the Ithaca Roast Beet', Incorporated? A, Yes. Q. Are you also the tenant of the building known as the Kentucky Doet Building? A. Right, Q, I show you Exhibits, marked for identification, and those are Exhibits S-A through 3-J, tan exhibits, and ask you meat they dopiestl A, Kell, what we did basically was take pictures of the building before the signs were covered up and than afterwards, so that we could get an idea of hew the decor of the plant would look with and without the signs. Q, So those aro taken from different angles# showing how this building would look both with and without the signs? A, Right, Q. They wore all at your request re-dosiped by Koshy Beef, so that they did or would confo s to the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Ithaca? A. Right, BY MR. CLYNESo Offer Appollant'a Exhibit 3, to show the appearance of the building, both with these signs and without, THE CHAIRsf Received. BY MR. CLYNESt Q, Now„ Mr, Martin, I show you Appellant#* Exhibit 2, gawked for identifica- tion, and ask you what this is intended to depict? A, This shows the dimensions of the sign. These aro originally drawn by Kentucky Roast Beef,e so in this +laser the signs would be smaller to fit in$ smaller that originally reaquired. Q, In other words„ the reigns Untuaky Boot wanted did not comply with the Zoning Ordinance? A, Right. Q, And th*" signs were re-dosigned to +eonfors? A, night. Q. Is the square footage of the respective letters and signs sot forth on Exhibit 2? A. Right. Q, And those signs shown on this exhibit ars the subject matter of this hearing? A, Right, BY MR, CLYNESr Offer Appellant's Exhibit 2. THE CHAIRi Received, BY MR. CLYNESe What the appeal boils down to, after our Zoning hearings when we made our oriVinal application for a sign$ we felt that this particular sign, "Kentuaky Beat", was part of the building. The Building Comissionrer felt it was a sign, So the individual lettorsi for examples the word OxeatboW is 22-3/4 square fest,# and the wordy; "Beef"# 10 square foot, and those were ro*►dssigned by the sign people to conform to our Ordinan"o Wo honestly fust that they do but there is a difference of opinion mere, vete are appealing on the basis that this is pert of the building and we are here asking that this be granted. Q, Mr, Martin, at the outset Kentucky Bead was reluctant tore•design? A. Right. Q. have you Informed these that they should re-design the signs to oonform to the Ordinance? �. Right. BY MR. CLYNRSs We felt that we ware complying with the Ordinanoo ani are here seeking relief; we fool that we have made o"ry effort to comply and that this should be granted,, This particular sign Is a part of the Kentucky Beef paekoga,. BY MR. MARTIits This was the third store to be built in 'the Vatted state .., and the only one this side of the Mississ "Is, sad is of oeurse being used to ahowr to passible fronehise", In thio type of business, three things are Important$ there is the product, the location and the 110080t The company wishes to create an image* An is of this would be Howard Johnson's. They have their own style of building with their image and people recognise their establishments. And this is what Kentucky beef is trying ° to de. I fool this is very important do+nn 'here and right now an ever a barrel with the ssmany# THE CHAIRS If i understand corree:t ly, if these ars In fact Signe, there are threat which are how many square feet? MR, CLYNtSt The "Kentucky" sign is '22»3/4 and "'Beef" is 10 square feet* THE CHAIR# so there are three sign# of approximately 32 square fee each? MR. CLYNESs Right, if you interpeat than to be eft $18n and not part of the buildinS* I submit that it 16M"Uttsrs with the signs on the building than with them bl*AW OU i:. MR. MARTINS We could of course take that side of the building and put In same psychedelic colors and when not# but tkis, as shown here is the image we desire to= creato. BY MR. CLYNh s While I der not speak now for the neiSbborhood# you will remember that previously we had a siseable outpouring of the neighborhood, We have tried to live up to our promises, as to the sign directing traffic to Meadow Stmt, and the tones which we put up. It Is a very clean looking area and in addition there has been a meta-looking shut *rooted to house the garbage and we are trying to keep the neighborhood happy. BY MR. PFANNs If the building Commissioner had agreed with you that the signs were in "so nee a part of the building, you would not be bore? BY MR. CLYNESt That is right. We thought they were and he thought they were not, and that is why we are herr*. BY MR. PFANNs Then you are asking for an interpretation? BY MR. CLYNESs No, are will defer to his interpretation and are asking an *arty relief, BY MR. FFANNs Have you measured each letter? BY MR. CLYNESs Kentucky Beef did, It is on Exhibit 2, BY MR. PFANNs Might it be on interrprrotaewtion if instead of taking each letter and measuring, that you take the area which the limits of the sign a9vori in other words,, it might show on Exhibit 3•H as the covered-up area, or 24 square f o . I see three panels covered by the word "Untucky". BY MR. GIORDA1NOs Right. BY MR. PFANNt Now about the sign that is in the front comer of the lilt? BY MR. MARTINI That *ane up and we ;Bot the proper papers and +rtonforrrAed BY DR. BALDINIs What is that total aro4 of that ,sign? BY MR. GIORDANOt 24 square feet. BY MR. PFANNt You have a variance in a B-4 sone? BY MR, GIORDANOt Right. BY M.R. PFANNi (Reading)t It says a maximum rise 23 square faart, and In a B-3 it aiays s t4except wriure the Board approves a larger sign". BY MR, CLYNESt There is a hose in it, When you start out with an R-i, It is specific In stating the *is*, when permitted for the premises, and in R-2 it goys, "the agree as R-1", and "R-3 the same as R-2", Then you go to B-2 and it says a maximum sire of 25 square f*et, but nowhere does It say you are limited to one sign* So you could haws any umber of these signs. I think it is a hole in the Ordinanae. BY MR. PMINt You are not asking under a B-4 for up to 250 square fast? A, Pio. Q4 So you are arguing there is a mistake in the Ordinance? A, No, this is part of the building and was part of the original plan, and then Chess were reduced in order to conform. I think it Amproves the building and there is no objection by the neighborhood. We thought we were complying when they went up. BY MR. PFANNt 1 wee► not saying them was any violation. I jest have a question in my mind as to the interpretation of the Zoning Ordinaneee and I as asking for an eVlanation it you have erns, BY MR. CLYNESt I an only appearing before a body that is designed to grant equitable relief. You do not want to talk about technicalities in the Zoning Ordinamees You leave it by right, BY MR. PPANNt The Planning Board doesn't seem to think so. BY MR. CLYNESt Well, they haven't approved for a lung time. Mr* Martin doesn't amen know Kentuoky Beef will go along with it. MR. MARTINI The company has indicated their displeasure with this. BY DR. SALDINIt I think it is poor public relations to poet your wish** on the community. The community is supporting it and this should be considered. BY MR. BENTKOWSKIt You are saying that you will have three Kentucky beef signs on the building? BY MR. CLYNOt Right. BY Mit. BtNTKOWSKI t Are those the plates that were submitted before? BY MR. CLYNBS t Yes, they were except that we reduced thaw. BY MR, BRNTKMKI t Don't I recall that the building did not laevo a sign on it? BY MR, CLYNESs The original plans arra still on file. BY MR. BENTKOWSKI t Are theaee illuminated? BY MR MARTINI The only sign that has the illumination is the front mo. It was decided that the others mould mover be lit. We have the bulbs in because it would otherwise west haw hot" showing. Having the bulbs in the sockets looks buttes this way. TU CRAIRt You do not lapel that this eaeestitutes a sign? BY MR, CLYNESt They seem to me to be a part of the building, This in right in it. This is as opposed to a pointed sign. 9. BY MR. CLYNESt They buy the psekage and it all Comm as ov ey but we were able to catch it in time to reduce them so that we mould motors. THK CHAIRt Is there any one else appeartaS on behalf of this appea l None Is there any one herr apposed to this appeal? None. SY MR. CLYNESs May I just say this? As a past of our application. Mr, Van Marter has suggested that we emphasiso again that the answer to Question No# It on the application, is "NO", as to whether this sign is illussinsted. UECUTIVE SESSIONO BOARD OF ZONIXG I1PPL*ALS, CITY 0P ITHACA, NOYDOEa 4,10" PRESENTS Geoffrey Weaver# Chairman Ralph Pa Boldin! Beverly Martin John Bentkovski George Re Piann, Jr. Ca Murray Yon Marter, Building Commwissiener b Secretary THE CNAIRs Case Noe 812 DR. UWINIt Move the pouting of the special permit, with the provision that the lotte"ag "Cooper Tires", an the Siete of the buil- ding be not Included for the reason that this will not be visible farout Elmira Road+ except for those vehialas ape, preaching from the south, and the "Cooper Tire" #i`S on the ground sign post identifies the preduot, and the smaller "Cooper Tire" sign suspended under the peak In the front of the building will further identity the product* I would thus move granting the special permit in the B-4 District* MR. SENTKONSKI s SeeNnd VMS Yeo - 3 No - O Motion carried. Application Njo. 812 granted* THE CHAIR# Case Igo. 813 MR. PPANNs Findings of Fact are as folloves whereas$ i} The word "sign" does include this type of advertisingi 2) The 1.tters spelling "Kentucky Beef" take up a total of 32.3/4 square foot on each of three (3) *igsss, which is in excess of the 25 square foot allowable in a 5-1 sonoi 3) The actual es+ctsnt of the d#gn should be s owwred from the limits of the letterings as shown by ti+eer boards covering up the lettsrsp three abiah are 3+ x 8•, or equal to approximately 72 square feet per sigsp 4) The Zoning Ordinance implies the maximum permitted area to be not sore than 25 square fest. Therefore I move to deny the application. BEVERLY MARTINS Second. VOTE s Yves - 3 No - 2 Motion carried* Application denied. THE CHAIRS Geeing bank to a prior assn„ Appeal No. 806, the moubers of the Board heaving reviewed the papers submitted, may we be" a a* MR. PFANNi Above the adoption of "A RESOLUTION DENYING A SPECIAL PERMIT AT 533-537 WEST STATE STREET* APPLICATION NO. 806 FILED BY ESTATE OF PETER ATSEDES". UVERLY MARTINS Second Motion unanimously carried. Mooting ad jouraod* Date of next seating set for Decouber 2, 1968 at 700 P.M. 3 I i i I ' I i I �I i i j1Introduced by: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dated:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . j A RESOLUTION Ii DENYING A SPECIAL PERMIT AT 535-537 WEST i' STATE STREET APPLICATION NO. 806 FILED BY ESTATE OF PETER ATSEDES I iiWHEREAS, application #806, a request for a special permit pursuant I ! ij � to Section 7, Column 4 of the Zoning Board of the City of Ithaca, has been I filed with the Zoning Board of Appeals by the Estate of Peter Atsedes, and f' I i WHEREAS, said application requests a special permit to erect an advertising sign in excess of the maximum 50 square feet on the wall of the it I I; property owned by Nicholas J. Chacona at #535-537 West State Street, and { WHEREAS, all members of the Board have had occasion to view said property, and II WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Board of Zoning Appeals I �! on September 5, 1968, in the Common Council Chamber, City Hall, Ithaca, i New York, to consider the application, and I WHEREAS, at said hearing all those who desired to be heard were I I heard and their testimony recorded, and WHEREAS, all testimony has been carefully considered and the following pertinent facts noted: i 1. The property in question is at the southeast corner of the I intersection of Meadow and State Streets. 2. The proposed sign would be attached to the north wall of the building on said premises, flat against the building. 3. The business to be advertised by said sign is located at I i i i i i I #216 East State Street. 4. The area of the sign is approximately 96 square feet. 5. The sign is indirectly lighted. • 6. Petitioner has adequate accessory signs at its place of business and other non-accessory signs at other locations. i 7. There already exists a small accessory sign on said building together with a large non-accessory sign attached to the west i face of the premises. NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Zoning Appeals that application #806, a request for a special permit pursuant to Section 7, Column 4, of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Ithaca to allow an advertising sign in excess of the maximum 50 square feet on the north wall of the building on the premises at #535-537 West State Street, be denied on the following grounds: I i 1..The applicant is not the owner of these premises and the business of applicant is not being conducted at this location, thus making the sign non-accessory to the business being conducted on said premises and therefore not essential to the identification of applicant's place of business. " 2. The applicant has failed to show adequate proof why a non- accessory sign could not be used at this location and achieve the intended purposes without exceeding the maximum standard of 50 square feet. 3. There already is an existing large non-accessory sign attached to the west wall of the building on said premises. 4. The applicant has failed to show there are no existing i violations of this ordinance on said premises. ig I -2- 5. The applicant has failed to show that the proposed sign does not equal 10% of the total wall area which faces the ` ( public right of way. I 6. The applicant has failed to show that the proposed special use would be in harmony with the orderly development of the I district and will not discourage the appropriate development of I adjacent land and buildings or impair the value thereof. 7. The applicant has failed to show that the proposed sign would not be more objectionable to nearby property than would a sign of less than the maximum limit of 50 square feet. t Adopted: Yes Ayes: i Nays: I i b i i i -3-