Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BZA-1973-04-02 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, CITY OF ITHACA9 CITY HALL, ITHACA 0 NEW YORK, APRIL 2, 1973 ----------------------------------------------------------- At a regular meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeals, II Ii �j City of Ithaca, held in Common Council Chambers, City Hall, Ithaca, New York, on April 2, 1973: PRESEWT: EDISCN JONES, Building Commissioneril & Secretary GEORGE HARPER* Chairman GREGORY KASPRZAK ELVA HOLMAN PETER MARTIN HARRY BORTZ C. MURRAY VAN MARTER DARLEEN LISK, Recording Secretary Chairman Harper opens meeting, listing members of Board prey ent. This Board is operating under the provisions of the It City Charter of the City of Ithaca and of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinances; the Board shall not be bound by strick, rules of evidence in the conduct of this hearing, but the determination shall be founded upon sufficient legal evidenc to sustain the same. The Board requests that all partici- pants identify themselves as to name and address, and confina their discussions to the pertinent facts of the case under consideration. Please avoid extraneous material which would have a delaying effect. Mr. Jones, the first case please. COMMISSIONER Jones lists what case #1001 is to be. APPEAL NO. 1001: The Appeal of Joseph Scaglione for a vari- ance under Sectioq 7 Column 2. at 311 Easti Lincoln Street In an R-3 zone. (k -2- I! I Edward Abbott: I am attorney Edward Abbott of 747 ,! First National Bank Building and I am representing Mr. Scaglione for I II this variance. The building now i houses Mae* s Kitchen, and it had a barber shop, but this we are asks g for tonight is a room in between where the barber shop was and the Kitchen is now, and it has been ;I vacant; BOCEES was In there for a while and now we have Clifford Todd who is here tonight if you want to f ask him any questions about his i� insurance business and it will not (� be open nights, it will not be open II Sundays, and I believe not on holi- days either. That type of business does not generate much traffic eith r, I but we are asking for the variance because Mr. Scaglione is retired, ij because of health reasons, and the place is a good tax payer and it is all figured out for this income ,bus to meet the expenses which become self-sustained. There are businessis around the area, I'm sure you peopli. (� realize than There is a washing ma- chine repair shop within a block - there is the Fall Creek House the other way a block - there is a laun dromat right next door to this - so there are several businesses in tha area. There are no structural chap es at all, you wouldn't notice anythin different from what it is right now it is just a room that is going to be occupied by Mr. Todd. So we are asking for the variance to allow this business to go in. I CHAIRMAN HARPER: What about signs? A. It will be in keeping with the ordi nance, I believe he is allowed five ' square feet. MR. MARTIN: The building is occupied .as a resi- li ence? 1 �3 -3- l si f - --_tel-���_ _ -------__--------- ---------�__—_�_e _' A. No, there are two roasts that are le upstairs, but as a residence, no he j doesntt live there. � MRS. HOLMAN- How many employees does Mr. Todd jl intend to have? i! A One part-time secretary, his wife, �t who is not considered an employee. MRS. HOLMAN: mat kind of parking will you have?� A. There is Just the street, there wil i probably be one or two cars in the ! day, most of the work is done by telephone. �! 1 I� ii MR. MARTIN: This same room was occupied by BOCEES you say, under a variance? i{ CCMMISSIONER JCNES. That wasntt required because a vari ance is not required for school ori �! ented occupation in an R-3 zone. MR. SCAN MARTEN.: All the tenants within the building now are Maets Kitchen, the vacant barber shop, the vacant office, and it the rooms to let? A. Yes that is correct. THE CHAIRt Any other questions by the Board? 11 None. Is there an one who wishes o e y st sps in favor of this appeal? None. Is there any one who wishes to oppo e this appeal? None. ii � iE EXECUTIVE SESSION, BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, CITY OF ITHACA, (( APRIL 2, 1973 i1 APPEAL NO. 1001: ASR. KASPRZAK: I move the Variance be granted. II MR. BORTZ: I second that. FINDINGS OF FACT; i 1) The Variance requested would no change the format of the use of the office as before, 1; 2) Given the existing uses in this )structure and the other commer-i dial uses in the neighborhood, we find that granting this Warm ! ante will not be injurious to i i the neighborhood, �i 3) The Board feels that hardship '! would exist without a Variance. i! ii 1 VOTE: YES - 5 NO - O ABSTENTION - l i � I i I i i i I i i -4- BOARD BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, CITY OF ITHACA, CITY HAIL, ITHACA, !� i, i NEW YORK, APRIL 21 1973 ,e 1 ----s--.--.-rrrr-.rw------- .---------------..r-.rw-r------------- COMMISSIONER r.a------COI ISSIONER Jones lista what oases #1002-#1007 are to be. APPEAL NOS.- 1002-1007.- The Appeal of Exxon Company for ex- ceptions under Section 7, Column 121, 1 at 335 East State Street in a B--4 zone, 902 West State Street in a f! l B-4 zone, 302 South Cayuga Street in1l, �I a B-4 zone, 507 South Meadow Street ! in a B-1 zone, 214 North Meadow f Street in a B-4 zone, and 202 east II Falls Street in a B-2 zone. ;I �1i JOHN B. HOOD: My name is Jahn Hood I am an attor y I with the law firm of NIXON, HARC A' , !I DEVANS & DOYi out of Rochester, New York to represent Exxon Gompanyl �I U.S.A. With me this evening, are I� i; some gentlemen who may be able to If answer some of your questions which jr you may have and also one gentleman j who will get up and wake a few re- marks. Cdr. William E. Tenny who is i� the sales supervisor for the area, 1� Cdr. Daniel Dragon who is the main- tenance representative, Mr. Harry i Crane who is the local marketing representative. The application, as I read your Sign Ordinance and your Zoning Ordinance is for a vari - ance frr the set-hack requirement of the Sign Ordinance and as such also cotes under the province of the Zon- ing Ordinance, so we are asking for an exception as well. What we are proposing to do is to change the existing Esso free standing signs; change the top of each of those signs with a rectangular sign; rathe than the oval sign that will say Exxon. I would like to point out here that I saw the article in the paper last week that said we :are changing one four letter wor* with another four letter worn well it is, a five letter ward, there are' two F 1 , l i �j to x' s in Exxon, just so we get that straight. We have applied for per-'1 ®its for these, and because of the set back requirements in the Zoning Ordinance and the Sign Ordinance, those permit applications were de- nied. I would like to make this point, that we are asking for a two }} fold, it is a two--fold application really, first is that you interprets the Sign Ordinance so that what we are proposing is really a name chap e in changing the top of each of thea existing signs does not come within , province of the Zoning Ordinance j and is not with the Sign Ordinance s is not prohibited because It does not constitute the erection or con- I, struction of a new sign, and as suc is a pre-e:;isting, nonconforming us , and as such we would be bound by th 1979 provision and then, using your interpretive powers If you decide I that we do have to come in, that wel are required to comply with those I set back requirements then, we would !� ask for a variance under the Sign Ordinance and the exception under i the Zoning Ordinance. MR. MARTIN: Assuming we construe these to be the same signs, they are all pre-exist- Ing? A. Yes, they all existed prior to the effective date of your Sign Ordinan e, each of the signs involved will be on the same base with the current saga; each of the poles except in one instance will be exactly the same pole. In the one case, becaus we are changing, taking down the porcelain sign and putting up a plastic sign we need a different type of pole structure to hold the sign up. So we are talking about replacing oval Esso logo insignia with a rectangular Exxon insignia. Appellant' s Exhibits 1 and. 2 marked !6« Appellant' s .Exhibits 3141, &5 marked! ii for identification. ' In terms of the Interpretation of the Sign Ordinance, the existing sign, the Esso oval that ii current�y up is approximately 40 square feet in size, the permitted size in the zones involved is 50 square feet and the actual square footage of th Exxon rectahgle we propose to put u is 36.7 square feet, so we are actually reducing the square footag of the size of the sign that is going ups although: there are five �. letters instead of four. The heigh- [ of each of these signs is approxi- I mately 17 feet 9 inches, in any II gent, the proposal to place the Exxon rectangle on top of each of these poles will not cause it to be� any higher, we ouril.l not .be extending the pole, in the one case where we are changing the pole that pole will not be any higher than the one that is currently there. The existing Esse sign is higher in dimension, Just the sign itself, the oval, tha the Exxon sign it is 5 feet 9 inche where the rectangle is 4 feet 5 3/4 inches. The width of the sign is less for the Exxon rectangle than it is for the Esso oval. so we have a smaller sign in all dimensions, including the square footagge. We submit that in using your interpae ve powers that this is not the typpe of construction of a sign to which the Sign Ordinance for the Cit of Itha a was directed and that the i.ty dial not intend that the change of sign should not be required to meet area set-hacks and indeed the change of a nam would require a relocation o each sof these signs to meet set-bac requirements or whatever other requirements might exist.: In Secti 14 of that Sign Ordinance there is requirement that the owner of the property or of the sign maintain t _7_ sign and keep it in good repair; no if he does that it is one step beyo d that to change the Esso letters to Exxon letters, and then I ask you would changing the letters make a difference, would we then have to move that sign. Then the next step is what we are doing here, that is changing the oval with the rectan- gle. Again, this is a nationwLde policy that Exxon has instituted an they are simply trying to get some degree of conformity throughout the nation as opposed to what they had before with different names in dif- ferent parts of the country. i MR. MARTIN: How would you have us deal with thi word alter, which is both in that section 14 and back in the definiti n of erect? r A. Well so does the word maintence tO maintain the sign - I will be very i'i! honest with you, I have some diffi- I cuities in interpreting your ordi- nance, i know it says alter, I know j� it says relocate, it also says to i maintain the sign. So in one case, it says that to maintain a sign is l to erect a sign which would mean that you have to comply with all th! I� requirements, which would mean to E relocate the sign. On the other i hand, section 14 imposes the re- j quirement that you maintain it; undir I the definition of to erect a sign, h technically speaking, if somebody i went out there to paint up some rust spots or to fix some wiring even i when it is required of him by secti�n 14 he would be erecting a new sign j and would have to come in here - ifi previously he did not read the re- quirements of that ordinance if his; location had been a pre-existing us , then he would have to move it back because he wanted to fix the wires. ii MR. MARTIN: What would you have us understand mrae►♦ t-n rnas►n4 �� �I l I} II (E II i' A. I think erect means any physical G relocation of the sign - in effect,1 ' a complete new sign going into a piece of property. If we were goin to move this pole and put in a new j base and move it even as much as a • ;I foot one way or the other, then I think we are erecting a new sign �( if we were constructing a new sign I� j then we would have to meet your re-� quirement s, If all we are doing �+ is changing a name and putting some thing different on top of an exist i! ing pole' ' I� think that is really i continuation of a nonconforming use that it should be allowed to contine-, so Lang as your ordinance permits ii, ! which is until 1979 as I understand j it. So the first part of pas -appli cation is that the requirements for set-back need not be met, we don't ` have to relocate each of these sign to meet the set-back requirements j simply because we are changing the name on top of that existing pole. MR. MARTIN: As I understand our role, we hear 1 appeals from rejections for permits by the Building Commissioner, so I I� take it you were denied a building permit? A. Yes, well we are ,asking you because you have, as I read your Zoning Ordinance, the power of interpreta- tion. As an alternative., if you should decide that indeed the chang of name is such to require a reloca tion of the sign including its pole and its base to meet the set-back requirements, then we are respect- fully requesting a variance to alto i the signs to remain where they are with the new name and the new rec- tangle on top of the existing poles Here I have one more problem with the Zoning Ordinance and hopefully you can help me out here, as fir. Jones has interpreted the ordinance there is a ten foot set-back requir - i -9- I I Zoning Ordinance and in the Sign Ordinance, if I am correct. There I� is also, however, in section 9 of your Sign Ordinance , No free-stand !I in sign shall be erected or main- , tamed in such a manner so as to project over or above any street, public highway, or waterway, nor- shall orshall any such free-standing sign b erected or maintained in such a maner as to project within eighteen inche (I of a public or private right-of-c,aay ji the inner edge of the public highwa , sidewalk, or waterway. Said sign I shall be set back at least ten feed from any public highway or street J right-of-way, Now the way I have I read that is that the pole itself oit the center of the pole has to be I set back ten feet. The edge of the sign in its closest proximity thil right-of-way line cannot be more t1vin li eighteen inches. On the other hand section 9 could be read to say that1, it cantt be over the right-of-way line. I am very confused by that provision. What we are asking for is to include the proposal to put up these signs in so far as they violate your Sign Ordinance - so if the eighteen inch provision applies or if the hang over the right-of-way provision applies, or if the ten fo t provision applies; any of those that may apply to these particular loca- tions, we are asking for an exceptl n from that. The basis for asking fo the exception from the Sign Ordinan e and the variance from the Zoning Ordinance is that we would have pra - ti.cal difficulties in moving the si ns back for the simple change of name. There is an obvious need for busine s- mans' identification, there is also the problem of traffic safety on your city streets. MR. MARTIN: Will you at some point explain to u how much of a hardship this is? i1 Ii i; ii -10- i A, First of all, it will involve more jj than just moving the pole, Mr. Crani will talk about the terms of the actual costs, but we think there ar other factors involved that bring about the practical difficulties besides Just the cost of moving the1 pole itself. 'i HARRY CRANE_ My name is Harry Crane and I am they !! Local Marketing Representative of jj the Exxon Company. First I would it i' like to introduce the men who are here tonight :and are the dealers of! our stations in the Ithaca area. Mr. Dick Russell from Meadow and �I Titus, Mr. Bob Bruce owner of the property at Taughannock and West �) State Street, Mr. Dike Kish is our contractor and distributer here in ; Ithaca, Mr. Bill Porter who owns th ' i property and operates the station at the corner of Cayuga and Clinton Mr. Iry Fisher who operates the ' station at West State and Taughan- nock, Mr. Morris Tolchin who oper- ates the station at Meadow and it Buffalo. And these are the people !r who are going to be most hurt by this change in the location of the 1 signs if we are forced to go ahead and make this move. And to show this, we had a local photographer take pictures as the motorist sees our location and I would like to pass these around. i Appellants Exhibit b marked for f I� identification. In each instance you can see that the motorist foresees our sign from either one direction, or in some �i cases both directions; the building itself is not visible because an adjacent building is protruding out to the street line. So the only sign that the motorist has that there is an Esso station or an Exxo station ahead is our sign and as yotl it I' I, �I i to move this back ten feet we would A lose this identification. Now this is very important to our dealers, but what it means is that the motor !; ist is going to bypass our station without seeing it and our competitors ji at the same time are allowed until it 1979 to have their signs out. This i� puts our dealers at a very disadvan 11 tageous positton and frankly it is going to cost business and money ou of their pockets. Another consider - tion is the safety factor, we have I. many tourists in the Ithaca area, 1, many businessmen travel through eve:y j day, in the summer we have a lot of! i� people coming up for the State ?ark close by, visitors to the colleges, ) and so forth. These pple are un- I familiar with our s , many of them carry the Esso credit card, th Exxon credit card; they are looking for our station. If they were to I ! see the station after they had par- tially passed it and make an attempt then to turn into it we could have �j some serious traffic accidents. I One of the purposes of the sign of course is to let the customer know far enough in advance that there is a station ahead, allow him to make I� a decision to purchase gas, to move safely into the proper lane, and male the proper signal. We think with our sign set back that this would not always be possible, Our compe- tition will be allowed to keep the signs out until 1979 and what we art j asking is for you to treat us fairl I and our dealers fairly and allow us the same privileges. At the time the Sion Ordinance changes for ever - one, of course we would have to moo our signs back but we would be at the same disadvantage as our compe- titors. The cost of making these changes is not simply the dost of moving the sign - in many cases to II move the sign would be impossible. ! Now Bill Porter is one instance if j; j ,3 j -12- you are familiar with his location at the corner of Clinton: and Cayuga he took-_.a vacant station and turned it into a very attractive and very successful corner but he has very ! limited space. This past year, we put up a $7,000 canopy to enhance Ule beauty of the place, if you will, aid I think that if you are familiar wi h ! it you will agree that the station � t is a very attractive location, To move that sign back would put it rii t back in the middle of his canopy; i other cases we would be moving back into the driveway so the customer (i could not get by the pole. In all j cases it would mean changing the traffic pattern through the station', and in some cases it would mean �i changing curb cuts, and here we would run into a problem with the State; so it is not simply a matter of moving back the sign - consider- ing several other problems. I don' think the Sign Ordinance was drawn up with the intention of hurting any local businessmen; but in fact this is what is going to happen to ! these six gentlemen if we are force j to bring our signs back while our competition is allowed to keep theirs out. she are open to any questions you might have. MR. MARTIN*- Ordinarily a variance does not carr I� a time limit, I gather from what you said that you would be quite happy with a Variance that strictly held � you with the same deadline as other nonconforming signs which is 1979. A. This is what we are asking, yes. JOMI B. HOOD: Exxon recognizes that sight pollution is uppermost in a lot of peoples minds but naturally they have to weigh the businessmans point of view, to the public point of view. I thi k Vi a, we whatjoy y ngahere© sothatwwel 1� i -13- j don't think that the change of name of a corporation is significant eno gh to have the city put one company atl a competitive business disadvantage II with a number of others when in ten s of what your ordinance already allo s for other stations, your sight pol- lution is not going to be increased ; or decreased. I'm only saying we j j' are willing to have that period of II time kept to 1979, I also note tha I think we have met most of your criteria, that are set forth in yo Sign Ordinance in terms of consider- ing the purpose for which the sign is erected, and how significant that may be the distance from which the sign can possibly be read, other sig s it in the vicinity of the proposed sig and we invite you to look at each o these locations if you wish to see the other signs both oil compares arid non-oil compan*es that have free-stand- ing ree-st d- ing signs that hang over the side- walks and almost into the public richt- of-way in a number of situations. The character of the neighborhood, we are in business and commercial I� zones, I don't believe the variance we are requesting as the second part �I of our application will cause a de- valuation of property because we arel talking about a free-standing sign, and indeed one that is smaller than the one that is there now. We think j that when you balance the protectio of the public interest and the desirability of maintained open ` spaces against what Exxon is really i trying to do here that you should grant the variance if you decide th • we have to comply otherwise with the i' Zoning Ordinance because it is the erection of a sign. But again we request that for the first pert of our application you interpret that ordinance so as not require that we meet the set-back requirements be- cause this is not the erection of a sign. I I , I� I it ii i THE CHAIR; Any other questions by the Board? MR. VAN MARTER; You are familiar with this kind of an application in other areas? j A. Yes, I am. j MR. VAN MARTER: Did you ever see a Sign Regulation II that related to the Zoning Ordinanc 'I that is not a part of the Zoning Ordinance, as this one does? A. In terms of my, experience, I have I, dealt with maybe three or four Sign Ordinances, some of them have been interpart of Zoning Ordinances., others have stated what their re- quirements are and then have said ii l you seek review you must comply witli Zoning Ordinance requirements, beyo d I that they did not, in those cases, integrate themselves into the Zonin Ordinance. I have not seen any yet that completely stand alone by themselves but I have seen what youl are talking about heretl have seen the Sign Ordinance which then re- fers-,to the Zoning Ordinance provis ons for procedure for review and appeal MR. MARTIN; It is hard to say that this one rea ly stands alone; circumstances under which we can grant a variance, the Zoning Ordinance spells that out under what circumstances In the Sigri Ordinance do you 'see that we have the power to grant a variance? A. I do think that the criteria for f asking for the variance are set forth in your Sign Ordinance and that thio e are the ones we have to meet first in section 18. - THE CHR; Is there any one who wishes to spec in favor of this appeal?' None. I � I Is there anyone who wishes to oppos None. jl r l ECUTIVE SESSION, BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, CITY OF ITHACA# � i APRIL 2, 1973 j! ii RMEST FOR INTERPRETATIOM OF THE SIGN ORDINANCE. j R. MARTIN As a Board we reject the request i !, for interpretation of the Sign Ordi�} l nance put forward in connection with cases 1002 through 1007; namel that the kind of sign change propos d in those cases not be considered th erection of a sign within the meani g of the Sign Ordinance. j MR. KASPRZAK: I second that. VOTE, YES - b NO - 0 j i i I I� i i i' !I i EXECUTIVE SESSION$ BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, CITY OF ITHACA, j APRIL 2 1973 iI j � q j APPEAL NOS. 1002-1007: MR. MARTIN: I move that we grant an Exception i to the Zoning and Sion Ordinances l to permit the erection of Exxon sigi S on poles at the present sites for cases 1002 through 1007, said Excep j� tion to expire on August 31, 1979* MR KASPRZAK: I second that. i FINDINGS OF FACT: i 1) There would be significant practical difficulties given to the competitive situations in each of these areas in cases j 1002-1007 in eliminating the i� signs; li �j 2) We find further that the modest reduction in the size means tha the spirit of the Sign Ordinanc s' provisions concerning nonconform- ing use shall be adhered to. VOTE: YES - 6 NO - 0 I a i j I I C E R T I F ICATI014 I � j; I DARLEEN F LISKO DO CERTIFY that I took the minutes it itof the Board of Zoning Appeals, City of Ithaca, in the mat- ters of Appeals No. 1001, 1002, 1003, 1004, 1005, 1006, 1007 on April 2, 1973 at City Hall, City of Ithaca, New York, tha I! I have transcribed the same and the foregoing is a true copy of the transcript of the minutes of the meeting and executiv session of the 3oard of Zoning Appeals, City of Ithaca, on j the above date, and the whole thereof. i I. I' I, �I r een T. Lisk Stenographer Ij i� Is Sworn to before me this day of� 19 ee i