HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZA 3166 - 420 College Avenue - Decision Ltr1
CITY OF ITHACA BOARD of ZONING APPEALS
Sign Variance Findings & Decision
Appeal No.: 3166
Applicant: Collegetown Bagels
Property Location: 420 College Avenue
Zoning District: MU-2
Applicable Section of City Sign Ordinance: §272-6B(2)
Requirement for Which Variance is requested: Number of Permitted Signs in a Commercial Zone.
Publication Dates: July 29, 2020 and July 31, 2020.
Meeting Held On: August 4, 2020.
Summary: Appeal of Collegetown Bagels for a sign variance from §272-6 B(2), number of permitted
signs in a commercial zone. The applicant is relocating its Collegetown location to the ground floor of the
Sheldon Court building. The main entrance to the restaurant faces the intersection of College Avenue and
Oak Avenue, and the commercial space extends approximately 100’ to the south along College Avenue.
The applicant proposes to install an awning with a 1.6 SF sign over the main entry as well as two wall signs
above window bays along College Avenue. Each wall sign will be 18’ 9” long by 10” tall and will be 15.6
SF. The two wall signs will be externally illuminated by LED lighting around the perimeter of each sign.
The proposal includes a total of three building signs and 32.8 SF of signage. The proposed signage meets
the square footage allowed under the sign ordinance but §272-6B(2) limits a business to two building signs.
The property is located in a MU-2 use district in which the proposed use is permitted. However, the Sign
Ordinance, §272-18, requires that variances be granted before a sign permit is issued
Public Hearing Held On: August 4, 2020.
Members present:
Suzanne Charles
Teresa Deschanes, Acting Chair
Stephanie Egan-Engels
Steven Wolf
Jason Fane, owner of multiple properties on Dryden Road and College Avenue, submitted a letter
of support that was read into the record.
There were no interested parties in opposition to the appeal.
CITY OF ITHACA
108 E. Green St. — Third Floor Ithaca, NY 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
JoAnn Cornish, Director
Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6565
E-Mail: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org
2
Tompkins County Review per Section 239 -l & -m of New York State General Municipal Law:
Not applicable.
Environmental Review: This is an Unlisted Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality
Review Ordinance (“CEQRO”), and State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”), and is subject
to Environmental Review. The City of Ithaca Board of Zoning Appeals hereby declares itself Lead Agency
for the environmental review for the approval of zoning appeal 3166, a sign variance for the property located
at 420 College Avenue in the City of Ithaca. The Board has reviewed the Short Environmental Assessment
Form (SEAF), dated July 27, 2020, and determines that the requested variance will result in no significant
impact on the environment.
Planning & Development Board Recommendation:
The Planning Board does not identify any negative long-term planning impacts and supports this appeal.
The building has a long storefront with varied orientations and merits an additional sign.
Motion: A motion to grant the variance request was made by S. Wolf.
Deliberations & Findings:
Signs face different points of view.
Two entrances – off of College Avenue and at entrance to Sheldon Court
Enliven and brighten that side of the 400 block of College Ave
Square footage does not exceed maximum allowed by right
Factors Considered:
1. Environmental Impact
The Board, acting as lead agency, has conducted appropriate environmental review and has determined the
requested variance will have no negative impacts on the environment. The Board discussed the specific
issue of sign lighting and has assurance it will be appropriated.
2. Size of sign:
The purpose for which the sign is erected and the distance from which the sign is intended to be read and
the character of the adjacent streets shall be taken into consideration. In all cases, the smallest sign that
will suit the purpose shall be the guide, taking into account legitimate business interests to be promoted by
the sign and the speed limits and traffic conditions on adjacent streets.
The size of the third sign (the awning sign) makes sense, given its location. It is under one foot tall, and
the total sign package is less than the square footage that is allowed for the property. Given the long
storefront, the size of the proposed signs is a reasonable approach.
3. Number of letters:
A sign with few letters need not be as large as one with many letters to be seen at the same distance. The
number of letters are appropriate for the size of the sign.
The proposed signs are the name of the businesses, which is reasonable and cannot be reduced.
4. Other signs:
The context of existing signs in the vicinity of the proposed sign shall be taken into considerations.
Each sign has its own purpose and function. The two long linear signs are on a different face of the building
and add symmetry to the College Avenue side of the restaurant. The doorway sign helps with wayfinding
and will guide customers to the restaurant.
3
5. The character of the neighborhood:
The proposed use shall not be detrimental to the general amenity of the neighborhood character so as to
cause a devaluation of neighboring property or material inconvenience to neighboring inhabitants or
material interference with the use and enjoyment by the inhabitants of neighboring parties. The proposed
sign will not be detrimental to the neighborhood character.
The proposed signs and use of the vacant storefront will improve the character of the neighborhood.
Collegetown Bagels will be a commercial anchor and will bring activity to the street.
6. Public Interest:
The protection of public interest and the desirability of maintaining open spaces, views and vistas shall be
considered insofar as possible. The proposed signage will not affect open spaces, views, and vistas.
The public interest will be advanced by having the business take a long-term stake in this often vacant
corner of Collegetown.
Second Motion to Grant Variance: Made by S. Charles
Vote: 4-0-0
Suzanne Charles Yes
Teresa Deschanes, Acting Chair Yes
Stephanie Egan-Engels Yes
Steven Wolf Yes
Determination of BZA Based on the Above Factors:
The BZA, taking into consideration the five factors for a sign variance, finds that the benefit to the applicant
outweighs the determinant to the neighborhood or community. The BZA further finds that variances from
the Sign Ordinance, Section 272-6B(2) is the minimum variance that should be granted in order to preserve
and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety, and welfare of the community.
___________________________ August 4, 2020
Megan Wilson, Senior Planner Date
Secretary, Board of Zoning Appeals