Loading...
1978-01-18 ;;~7~- Official Minutes of the QUEENS BURY ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS held January 18, 1978 at 7:35 P.M. There were present: George Kurosaka, Acting Chairman Ted Turner Sjoerdge Richardson Charles Sicard Kirkham Cornwell being members of the Board. Guests: George Liapes Harold Boynton The Board agreed to table the approval of the December minutes d~e to the length of the minutes and to give the Board an opportunity to carefully read the minutes. OLD BUSINESS: Variance # 519 - Henry Anable Quaker Road (Warren County Planning Board) M-l Zone Mr. Turner stated that this variance was tabled at the December meeting to revise the application to .the actual being requested. This variance is to permit repair, display and the sale of mobile homes. Six mobile homes on display, six mobile homes for repair. The applicant operates a used car lot on premises. Only a small proportion of the premises is devoted to the used car lot. Applicant may obtain greater revenue from a more full use of his premises. Mr. Renaud and Mr. Anable appeared on behalf of this application. Mr. Kurosaka asked Mr. Renaud if they wanted six mobile homes on display and six for repair, no more than twelve on the lot at one time. Mr. Renaud stated that that was correct. Variance # 519 Page 2 ~ 7G.... Mr. Renaud stated they are going to put a fence along the back, as soon as the weather permits, so the damaged mobile homes they are repairing won't be visible to the public. Mr. Kurosaka asked Mr. Renaud if the six mobile homes for sales display would be located along the side. Mr. Renaud stated that they would. Mr. Sicard asked Mr. Renaud how high the fence would be. Mr. Renaud replied that it would be approximately 10' high. Mr. Sicard stated that the fence would have to be a privacy fence, completely boarded, not a chain link fence. Mr. Renaud stated that the fence would be a privacy fence, not a chain link fence. Mr. Sicard asked what the depth of the lot was from the road back. Mr. Anable stated that it is almost four acres, 250' front and 800' deep. Mr. Cornwell asked if any living was going to be done in any of these homes. Mr. Renaud stated that there would be no living in any of the mobile homes. Mr. Cornwell asked if the used cars were eventually going to be phased out, is it going to be mostly mobile homes or mostly used cars? Mr. Renaud stated that it is equal right now. Mr. Cornwell asked Mr. Renaud what their intentions were regarding signs on the lot, are they going to want a sign saying "mobile homes" in addition to the car sign? Mr. Renaud replied yes, he believed that was on the application. Mr. Cornwell stated that that was not on the Page 3 ~ 77 Variance # 519 application. Mr. Kurosaka stated that Mr. Anable could put up a conforming sign. Mr. Cornwell asked for which business. Mr. Kurosaka stated either or. Mr. Cornwell stated either or, but one sign. Mr. Kurosaka stated that Mr. Anable could put up one sign and put two bus- inesses on the sign if he wants to. Mr. Cornwell stated that Mr. Anable couldn't put up two 50' signs. Mr. Cornwell asked what is the rea.l reason for requesting the ordin- ance. Mr. Cornwell stated that greater revenue is not a permissible reason for getting a variance, Mr. Sicard stated that it is set-up for light manufacturing in that area and you could define repairing as light manufacturing if you wanted to stretch a point. Mr. Cornwell stated that the reason on the application is not a valid reason. Mr. Cornwell asked who owns the property. Mr. Anable replied that he did. Mr. Cornwell asked who owns the property to the east and west. Mr. Anable stated that he thought Brayman owned the property to the west. Mr. Sicard asked Mr. Boynton if there was a problem down there recently in an effo~to get some mobile homes moved out of there or something, did we have to go to litigation on that? Mr. Boynton replied no, they got the mobile homes moved, they are gone. Mr. Sicard stated that he understood that, but did it take quite awhile to get them moved, were they moved at Mr. Boynton's request? Mr. Lia pes stated that they sent Mr. Anable a notice to remove the mobile homes and they were removed Page 4 ~ 7 J' Variance # 519 the day prior to the expiration of the notice. Mr. Sicard asked Mr. Renaud if they had a lot of trouble down there with thievery and this kind of thing and won't this fence hiding all these things promote this type of thing, Mr. Renaud stated that they have added lights to the building and are getting tremendous police protection now. Mr. Sicard asked if the fence is going to surround the entire area, complex. Mr. Renaud stated that there would be just a fence in the front. Mr. Sicard asked Mr. Renaud if they already have a franchise for new mobile homes or is'this something they are going to come on to later, on. Mr. Renaud stated that they lost their franchise by not being able to put a double-wide in. Mr. Sicard stated that he didn't think getting a franchise for mobile homes would be a problem. Mr. Renaud stated t~t they had one ordered that set in South G£ens Falls but they were unable to pick it up and put it on their lot, the modular they applied for. By waiting, they put it on the floor plan and discontinued the offer. Mr. Sicard asked Mr. Renaud if they would not be using modular homes, but would be using mobile homes, 12* wide. Mr. Renaud replied yes, 12' to 14' wide. The Warren County Planning Board (November 9, 1977) disapproved this variance. They stated that this project would be a new and additional non-conforming use. The Queensbury Planning Board (November 2, 1977) disapproved this Page 5 ~79 Variance # 519 variance. They stated that they disapproved this variance on the basis that it is not good planning. \ Mr. Kurosaka stated that they have a disapproval from thé Warren County Planning Board that requires, in case of a vote, you have to have a majority plus one for an approval. There are six members on the Board, three on each side. The majority is four, the majority plus one is five. So you have to have all five votes for approval tonight. If Mr. Fitz- gerald were present, it would be a different situation. Mr. Boynton asked where Mr. Renaud was going to be allowed to sell these mobile homes. Mr. Boynton stated that they won't be allowed to be sold in the Town of Queensbury, they have to be state approved. Mr. Sicard stated that he thought Mr. Renaud has probably gone into the ramifications of selling in the Town of Queensbury. Mr. Kurosaka stated that all the new mobile homes are no problem but some of the old mobile homes may create a problem. Mr. Renaud stated that the mobile homes will meet HUD standards. Mr. Kurosaka asked Mr. Boynton if he conducted local inspections on older homes. Mr. Boynton stated that he didn't. The town just doesn't allow older homes in and they will not even issue anyone even an appli- cation for a mobile home unless it is state approved or HUD approved. Mr. Sicard asked Mr. Boynton about mobile home courts. Mr. Boynton stated that as far as he knows, they have no jurisdiction as far as what is moved into a mobile home court. Mr. Boynton stated that he thought - it is in the offing and he thinks it should be, but right now he doesn't think it is. Mr. Kurosaka stated that they have no control over the Page 6 ~ (;'0 Variance # '519 courts just mobile homes on individual lots. Mr. Renuad' stated that when the homes were remanufactured they would be brought up to HUD standards; smoke detectors, fireproofing, etc. Mr. Kurosaka stated that if you rebuild the mobile homes you have to bring them up to HUD standards before you put them back on the lot. Mr. Boynton asked who was going to say the mobile homes that have been remanufactured are brought up to HUD standards. Mr. Kurosaka stated that they would have to hire somebody to do it. Mr. Cornwell asked Mr. Renaud what the most important business, the rebuilding the homes or the display for sale. Mr. Renaud stated that they both go together. Mr. Kurosaka stated that they will have to take the older homes in trade sometimes for the new homes and they have to bring the older ones up to meet the standards to rèsell them. Mr. Cornwell stated that this Board is under some responsibility to support the planning boards except that he doesn't think the boards have considered the manufacturing aspect of this thìng. They are against expanding the sales in an M-l area. Manufacturing isn't M...l.' Mr. Sicard stated that if it was strictly manufacturing Mr. Anable wouldn't need a variance. Mr. Kurosaka stated that if Mr. Anàble was just taking trailers and rebuilding them he~ouldbe-running'a manufacturing operation, but the sale of the new mobile homes creates the problem. Mr. Cornwell stated that he didn't like to vote against the two planning boards on this thing. Page 7 ;;: 8)1 Variänce # 519 Mr. Sicard made a motion that Variance # 519, Henry Anable be approved subject to the following qualificatïons: 1. That a lO'fence be erected across the property in the rear of the existing building so that any of the mobile homes that are under repair will not be seen from the highway. 2. There will never be anymore than six mobile homes in the front of the building at anyone time. 3. Allow this variance for one year, on a trial basis. Mr. Sicard stated he thought Mr. Anable would probably want to put six mobile homes in the front of the building and Mr. Anable would want to put a rebuilt mobile home in front too so Mr. Sicard doesn't think the Board should hold it down to six new mobile homes. Mr. Sicard stated that Mr. Anable should be able to have six new or completed mobile homes in front. Mr. Cornwell asked Mr. Sicard if the one year variancè limitation would be ~enewable. Mr. Sicard stated no, that Mr. Anable would have to come in for a new variance. Mrs. Richardson seconded Mr. Sicard's motion. Carried. The Board: RESOLVED: THE BOARD GRANTED THIS VARIANCE AS MINIMUM REASONABLE USE OF LAND SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. ERECT lOFT. FENCE AT REAR OF BUILDING SO AS NOT TO BE SEEN FROM MAIN ROAD. 2. NOT MORE THAN SIX MOBILE HOMES AT ANYTIME NEW OR COMPLETED. 3. ONE (1) YEAR PERMIT ON VARIANCE - RENEWABLE IN ONE YEAR. Variance # 520 Page 8 ~~L Variance # 520 - R. J. Grasse C-3 Zone Northway Plaza (Route 9) (Warren County Pla~ning Board) Mr. Kurosaka disqualified himsèlf from voting on this variance. Mr. Robert Platt, Signs of Progress, and Mr. Grasse appeared before the Board on this application. The legal opinion letter from the town attorney, Joseph Brennan, was read. Mr. Sicard asked Mr. Platt if the orïginal intent was to come up above the roof line 2', iM~thête'a chai~e~here? Mr. Platt stated that the intent was to come up above the roof line 2'. Mr. Platt stated that he thought there was something wrong in the letter. Mr. Platt stated that the R. J. Grasse sign, the original sign, was above the roof line. Mr. Piatt'stated that the big sign was about 3' to 4' over the top of the roof and the R. G. Grasse sign was 2' over the top of the roof. The R. U. Grasse sign being 4! high,~split"fifty-fifty, there would be 2' over the roof line and 2~ under the roof line. One of the objectives to put the sign above the roof line was so that the sign would stand out with all the other signs. Mr. Sicard asked Mr. Platt if the sign is 2' above the roof line) then the sign will not line up with the Dee's Card Shop sign, will it? Mr. Platt stated that it would, both the signs are 4' high. Mr. Sicard stated that then the lawyer's letter is wrong because Page 9 Variance # 520 ~~ v he is saying 1'. Mr. Platt stated that the lawyer has the same idea but his figures are wrong. Mr. Sicard stated that the Board has the sketch in front of them and those figures are correct. Mr. Cornwell asked Mr. Platt if the sign, that they now have there, is the same size as the green outline. Mr. Platt stated that it was. Mr. Cornwell asked Mr. Platt that what he is now applying for is permission to put the sign above the roof line and also to have the size that you have. Mr. Platt replied no. Mr. Platt stated that they have the permit for the size of the sign, there is no question on that. Mr. Platt stated that the question is that the variance ordinance will bring the sign up above the roof line by 2'. Mr. Cornwell asked Mr. Platt if height was the only thing the Board was considering tonight. Mr. Platt stated that was correct. Mr. Platt stated that there were twø reasons. One reason is the sign doesn't line up with the other sign, Dee's sign, at the present time. The second reason is that you have a problem viewing the sign. As people are walking into Mr. Grasse's place of business, they have to look up, back up, and so forth, and more especially now that there is snow up on the roof, it hides it even more. Mr. Platt stated that he would just like to request the Board to alter the ordinance with a variance to rai~e0the sign another 2' above the roof line. Mr. Cornwell stated that the orrginal plea was that you couldn't see the sign form any distance. Mr. Cornwell asked Mr. Platt if he Page 10 1 ~~ Variance # 520 was not worried about the distance anymore. Mr. Platt stated that that was pertaining to the size. Mr. Platt stated that they resolved this situation with about the fifth reading of the ordinance. Mr. Cornwell stated that now Mr. Platt was going up against the intent of the sign ordinance which someday would bring the Dee's sign down to roof level too. If Dee's ever changed hands it would be desirable to get their sign down too but you beat them to it. Mr. Platt stated that to a point, Dee's sign when it was erected was a legal sign and it was put up at the time that there were being permits issued and he thinks they were at that time being considered a legal sign. Mr. Platt stated that all Mr. Grasse is trying to do here is to make the appearance the same as the old sign that was there. Mr. Cornwell stated that the intent of the ordinance is to gradually get the signsdowft, not to keep them up. Mr. Platt stated that he agreed that the new intent of the ordinance was to'lower the signs down to the same level. Mrs. Richardson stated that the new ordinance intends to do away with signs that extend above the roof line. Mr. Platt stated that he can not disagree with the intent of the writers of the sign ordinance. Mr. Platt thinks it is a great idea. Mr. Platt stated that he has been in towns and cities that have the most ungainly roof signs up on the roofs. They are terrible looking, the structures, a lot of steel, things welded up together, etc. Kingston is a tragic example of this. In those situations where you have a house Page II J. 8S- Variance # 520 that has been made over into a store and they stick these structures up on the roof with a lot of angle iron bracing, Mr. Platt agrees lOO%. Mr. Platt stated that he was so glad that the Board and he could agree, for example, on the Long John Silver sign, to put the sign up there on that roof without changing the profile of the roof itself. Mr. Platt stated that this is a different case. Mr. Platt stated that he thinks this is the type of case the Zoning Board of Appeals should really consider is not that type of situation. Mr. Platt read the reasons for the Board of Appeals approval of a variance as it states on page 23 of the sign ordinance. He reads "No variance in the strick application of the provisions of this ordinance shall be granted by the Board of Appeals unless it finds that there are apecial circumstances or conditions applying to the land or a sign," Mr. Platt stated that he finds these are special conditions applying to this particular sign and also the situàtion with the sign on the roof. "and not applying generally to land or signs in the neigh- borhood and the said circumstances or conditions are such that the strict application of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of such sign or land, where the variance would otherwise be in general harmony with restrictions established for the area," Mr. Platt stated that asking for this particu- lar variance, raising the sign above the roof line is in general Variance # 520 Page 12 c-.< ð 0 harmony with the restrictiO'ns established for this area, previously established. "and where it shall find that the request made is the minimum variance that will accomplish the necessary objectives intended," Mr. Platt stated that he is not asking to raise the sign 5' or any unusual amount, he believes this is the minimum number of feet that could be asked for that would accomplish the necessary objective. "and that the granting of the variance will be in general harmony with the general purpose and intent of this Ordinance," Mr. Platt stated that the general intent of this part of the ordinace was to keep the roof signs down off the face of the roof or sticking up and projecting higher than the roof line and on houses and like that, like the sit- uations you would see in Kingston, and that particular part doesn't apply, he doesn't think their thinking there applies to this particular sign. "and ,with the master plan of the Town of Queensbury and will not otherwise be injuriO'us to the neighbO'rhood or detrimental to' the public welfare." Mr. Platt stated that it is neither injurious to the neighbor- hQod because it is "Sign City" down there any way, in the mall, as we knO'w and it is certainly not detrimental to the welfare of the public. Mr. Platt stated that as far as he can see, he can't see why the Board cân't just go ahead and approve the variance. Mr. Sicard asked Mr. Platt if the sign would be in line with the Dee's sign. Mr. Platt stated that the sign would line up with Dee's exactly. V_riance # 520 Page l3 ~ðl Mr. Kurosaka stated that this Board has already established a presidence of putting a limitation on this sign for the period, the ten year amortization period that was put into the sign ordinance when it was rewritten, this may answer your question, you can condition it and the lawyers told us you can. Mr. Kurosaka stated that you phrase this so that this sign goes out the the other sign. Mr. Cornwell stated that the life of this shopping strip would be increased if the signs became more modern, more quickly. Mr. Cornwell stated that it would be in Mr. Grasse's and Mr. Platt's best interest if the whole strip had a longer life and did not become what Mr. Platt refers to as "Sign City" and sooner or later there will be a tendency of clients to move out to a better strip of mall and to get everything to conformance before the ten years would be to Mr. Grasse's and Mr. Plátt's advantage. Mr. Platt stated that as he sees that mall up there, there seems to be nothing but growth, even in the face of tremendous competition with another 70 to 80 stores opening up at the Aviation Mall, still they went ahead and erected several new stores up there and he guesses most of them are rented. Mr. Platt stated that he guesses you really can't say that people are looking for a more quality place and are moving out. Mr. Platt stated that he agrees with the Board that if it comes to the time when the ten years is up and the time comes when everybody Variance # 520 Page 14 J ~Õ begins to come into conformity, and everybody shallor will or should, whatever their legal right will be at that time to come into conformity. Mr. Platt stated that the ten years isn't up though. Mr. Sicard stated that hetbhinks this is a very unusual location. Nobody seems to be mentioning the fact that this store is situated in a corner and you can very easily go by it. If you are driving you are dead, if you are walking you might see it. Mr. Sicard stated that this is his opinion, he is in the mall prid near everyday and Fie sees this same situation. This store is tucked into a corner h'ere and Mr. Sicard stated that even if Mr. Grasse wanted to apply for hardship, he thinks Mr. Grasse has a hardship by the fact that he is located in the corner. Mr. Sicard stated that Dee's is bad,~ enough. Mr. Sicard stated that he circled the mall 3 or 4 times today and he like ordinary dtivers looked ahead except if there is something going on that/he wants to really see on the side, but if you just look to the right, you will not see that store without some type of sign definit~æy. Mr. Sicard stated that in his estimation if you did not line up the sign with Dee's, if you lowered it or raised it, either way, asteticallty it would not look right. If"you lower it, it would not look right. If you raise it, it would not look right. Mr. Sicard stated that if you put a conforming sign in there and lowered it according to the bottom one there that you have~in the orange one (referring to drawing) he doesn't think that it will do that area a bit of good. Mr. -åicarà stated that you Variance # 520 Page 15 J:B9 are putting in a sign that is pretty much the same as the existing one that is in there and he thinks that if you have to have a sign, and Mr. Grasse does,that he is not going to be in business, and if everybody goes without signs they won1t need them at all. Mr. Sicard stated that'he doesn't think the Town of Queensbury is trying to do this. Mr. Sicard stated that he~pera~*al!',thiRksj±f this ~ign goes in and it lines up with Dee's sign and it is under the ammeritization ruling whêre in eight years it will be removed, he thinks this is the thing to do. Mr. Cornwell stated that in his opinion Mr. Grasse made an:admirable compromise with the present size and character of the sign. Mr. Sicard agreed with Mr. Cornwell and stated that the big sign came~down which didn't look a bit good. Mr. Sicard stated that he saw that sign up there too prior. Mr. Cornwell stated that he thought it was a good compromise t l-he w!tll go aiDng'wi~hr;1:il!le~si1Jêl·lt~bgtr,he eág~not condòne putting the-<sign up because sooner or later we are going to get a chance to put Dee's down and some èt the others,::à!t'eealready'dawn\' r like Pter Harris is almest'/dewn. Mr. Sicard agreed with Mr. Cornwell but stated that Peter Harris is in a little different location. Mr. Cornwell stated that Mr. Grasse doesn't relý on traffic7'off the street as much as Peter Harris does, Mr.~Grasse has appointments. Mr. Grasse stated that right now He does rely on traffic off the streets. Mr. Sicard stated that if Mr. Grasse~d[dn't rely on traffic off the streets he could be up on the upper end of Bay Road a lot cheaper than he can Page 16 J.ýo Variance # 520 be here. Mr. Sicard stated that you do rely on traffic today. There are people that come down from North Hebron and go into that mall and they don't know from one store to the other until they see it here. Mr. Platt stated that he would just like to talk about raising the sign over the roof line again. He stated that you can not see any ~tru~tural bracing in the back of the sign at all (feferring to piqture) and that is because he has 2 heavy irons coming up the wall here (indicating on picture) and here, maybe three he guesses there are, and the sign is bolted and welded to these irons. Mr. Platt stated that in the normal type of sign that goes over the ròof line, on a building for example, there is a lot of stringers, headers, and so forth, metal that goes back to the roof, so it makes it a very neat installation. Mr. Sicard asked about the lighting of the sign. Mr. Grasse stated that the lighting seems to be fine and the only problem is that it is melting the snow on the canopy and is causing some backup. Mr. Sicard asked Mr. Grasse if he would be lighted at night, anytime the business is closed down you would not be lighted. Mr. Grasse stated that there is a timer on the lights, it goes on at 4:30 PM and goes off at lO:OO PM. The Warren County Planning Board (November 10, 1977) disapproved this variance. They commented that by approving new signs it is con- flicting wi th the néw sign ordinance. The Queensbury Planning Board (November 2, 1977) approved this variance. Mr. Platt asked the members of the Board if any of them had been Page 17;,¿ 7/ Variance # 520 to a county planning board meeting. Mr. Platt stated that the county planning board does not give any consideration to the request at all and he doesn't see how they can ecen rule on it. They are not interested in your issues and the proposals that you are making. They are not interested in hardship or anything. Mrs. RichardsQn stated that the Board could not even vote on this variance tonight because they do not have five votes. Mr. Platt stated that in fairness to Mr. Grasse this is the third time Mr. Grasse and he have been before the Board and he is disappointed that the Board has not reached a conclusion. Mr. Sicard stated- that he is ready to make a motion on this variance but if he does he thinks it would be to Mr. Platt's and Mr. Grasse's disadvantage. Mr. Platt stated that as he understands it, the Board can not vote anyways. The Board only has four voting members. Mr. Platt stated that Mr. Sicard can't make a motion on the variance because you can't vote on it because the Board doesn't have the necessary quorum. The Board has to have five yeses and the Board can only possibly garner four yeses because Mr. Kurosaka disqualified himself. Mr. Kurosaka stated that if Mr. Fitzgerald were present he would have to vote. Mr. Platt stated that he didn't think Mr. Fitzgerald was voting lately. Mr. Kurosaka stated that Mr. Fitzgerald votes only if the vote is tied or in the case of the five votes. Mr. Cornwell stated that Mr. Fitzgerald, as Chairman, .can vote if he wants to. Mr. Kurosaka stated that Mr. Fitzgerald can Page l8 Variance # 520 '\ j C:"ì C-'\ I c/.. vote but it is a rule that Mr. Fitzgerald and he set-up themselves as a policy, they wouldn't vote when acting as Chairman. Mr. Platt stated that on page 21 of the sign ordinance it says, "The Board of Appeals shall decide each appeal wi thin sixty (60) days of filing thereof." Mr. Platt stated that he knows that the Board has been unable to reach a conclusion for various reasons not of which is the Board's fault but he thinks that the people who wrote this ordinance had a feeling that sixty (60) days would have been long enough to devote on a variance, that would have been two meetings. Mr. Platt stated that here they are at the third meeting and there still isn't åny conclusion reached. Mr. Platt stated that Mr. Grasse has done everything that he is suppose to do, he has attended every meeting and come before the Board, he has filled out the proper forms, paying the filing fee of $25.00 and obviously Mr. Platt can't come up here these nights for nothing and Mr. Grasse is the one that is getting hurt on this whole affair. Mr. Sicard stated that the only thing the Board could do would be to have a special meeting for this particular variance but it would be very difficult to do. Mr. Fitzgerald is in New York on business and pro- bably will be back in a couple of days. Mr. Sicard stated that Mr. Platt or he could request the Board to come in for a special meeting that would take 10 to 15 minutes for the ptirpose of just voting. Mr. Sicard stated that he doesn't know how the rest of the Board feels about this but it is very true that this has taken 3 separate meetings and he was hoping Variance # 520 Page 19 293 that the Board could settle this tonight. Mr. Sicard stated that he spent quite a bit of time on it himself today riding around up there and is convinced that Mr. Grasse has a problem, a problem other than any of the other stores up there, by reason of the fact that it sets in the corner in the back of Montgomery Wards. Mr. Platt stated that he has some questions about the opinion letter from Joe Brennan, Town Attorney. Mr. Platt stated that it says on page 2 of the letter, "It was, and remains, my legal opinion in con- nection with such a situ~tion that the particular changes in the same pre-existing, non-conforming sign were permissible withbut obtaining a variance if they would truly make the sign less non-conforming and would not constitute a "structuralalteration7 and that he doesn't understand this part. Mr. Sicard stated that you can not make it less non-conforming and not have a structural change, if you make it lèss non-conforming you have to make it smaller, then you have to structurally change it. Mr. Sicard stated that if you go down to the legal sizè, don't you intre- pret it that way? Mr. Platt stated that he did not intrepret it that way. Mr. Liapes stated that if the ~ign, like E. J. Zibro, you change the panel and you have no structural change and you take the sign down like you did the Mr. Walt's sign, that is the difference in the two. Mr. Liapes stated that if you took the sign down and replaced it with a new sign that is different and it is not the same situation as Zibro's. Mr. Platt stated that as he sees it, the problem comes up as people change hands, the store changes ownership. Mr. Platt asked what if the Page 20 Variance # 520 man has the same sign there? ;{7T Mr. Liapes stated that it has no effect on that, nothing in the ordinance provides for that. Mr. Kurosaka stated that if the Mr. Walt's sign was still up there with a changed text on it, then you wanted to change it, then you are going less non-conforming and it is no problem. Mr. Kurosaka stated that the lawyer is telling us that the $ign was physically removed. It is a legal technicality, but that is what has happened. Mr. Platt stated that, so in other words, if we take one sign down we can't put a sign up even if it is smaller. Mr. Kurosaka stated that if you did it immediately, they would issue you a sign permit to put the sign up to replace the other sign because it is smaller and less non-conforming. Mr. Kurosaka stated that the next time don't take the old sign down until you have a new sign built that is smaller and put it right up in the old sign's place. Mr. Platt stated that Mr. Grasse didn't have any alternative on this, the sign belonged to the other man. Mrs. Richardson stated that she did not agree with Mr. Kurosaka. Mrs. Richardson stated that that wasn't the intent of the sign ordinance and she would quarrel with that intrepretation. Mr. Kurosaka stated that the sign ordinance states nothing about change of ownership. Mr. Cornwell stated that the intent of the sign ordinance is new owner, new sign, and new rules. Mr. Sicard stated that is the intent but that is not stated in the ordinance. Mrs. Richardson stated that she objects to what Mr. Kurosaka is Page 21 J 9)- Variance # 520 saying about the change of ownership and signs. The Board stated that they would be willing to hold a special meet- ing to vote on this variance. Mr. Platt stated that Mr. Grasse does have a sign up and that Mr. Grasse is willing to come back again month so the Board will not have to hold a special meeting. Mr. Platt stated that if Mr. Grasse did not have a sign up he would aske the Board to have a special meeting. The Board: RESOLVED: TABLED TO FEBRUARY 15, 1978 MEETING DUE TO LACK OF QUORUM? NEW BUSINESS: . Variance # 533 - Texaco, Inc. C-3 Zone Route 9 at Exit 20 Northway (Warren County Planning Board) No appearances on behalf of this application. The Board: RESOLVED: TABLED TO FEBRUARY 15, 1978 MEETING DUE TO LACK OF QUORUM. The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 PM. ft,,· //', ',>;$' ".- c \L:::.¿ (~&(: ,.<--(,y ~' iþc..-/ ~ ' /~, /. ,/ ....¿'é~F ¡/ ¿¿{.~j<",,__