Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSummary of Reasoning (473 and 479 Station Ave, SY) 1 Law Office of Singer & Singer, LLC 26 Upper County Road P. O. Box 67 Dennisport, Massachusetts 02639 Andrew L. Singer Tel: (508) 398-2221 Marian S. Rose Fax: (508) 398-1568 )))) www.singer-law.com Myer R. Singer (1938-2020) Yarmouth Board of Appeals 473 and 479 Station Avenue, South Yarmouth SUMMARY OF REASONING Colbea Enterprises, L.L.C. [“Applicant”] is the tenant at the property located at 473 and 479 Station Avenue in South Yarmouth [“Property”]. The Property, which is located in the B1 Zoning District and the Aquifer Protection District [“APD”], is shown as Assessor’s Map 97, Parcels 1, 2, and a portion of Parcel 3. The Board of Appeals has granted a special permit and variance (Petition Nos. 4801 and 4802) to authorize a development/redevelopment proposal that includes closing, decommissioning, and restricting two old, outdated, active, nearby fuel service station properties (Shell and Sunoco) and replacement with the new state-of-art fuel service station (Shell) and convenience store (Seasons Corner Market) with co-brand on the Property. The overall project will result in significant environmental protection and improvement within the APD by reducing the threat of negative impact to the aquifer, decreasing the current numbers of both fuel service stations and gallons of fuel stored, eliminating two sites with pre-existing nonconforming hazardous materials use and replacing them with one relocated site that will improve containment and usage at the new Property. The final step in the development/redevelopment process is finalizing freestanding and building signage at the Property. Directional signage has previously been approved by the Board of Appeals. The proposed signage will replace signage for the existing business that is relocating from across the street at 446 Station Avenue. All freestanding, attached building, and dispenser signage is being removed and not 2 replaced from this other property (see submitted plan and photographs of existing signage). The Applicant worked with the Building Commissioner to determine which portions of the proposed sign package at the Property require relief from the Board as detailed in the next paragraph. Specifically, the Applicant is requesting a variance from Section 303 of the Yarmouth Zoning By-Law [“Zoning By-Law”] in accordance with Section 102.2.2 of the Zoning By-Law and M.G.L. Chapter 40A, Section 10, in order to install the following signs: 1. Section 303.5.4.1 – freestanding sign -- face area square footage (24 sq. ft. max allowed, 32 sq. ft. proposed, 30.56 sq. ft. existing 446 Station Avenue Shell); 2. Section 303.5.5.2 – attached building signs -- height for Seasons and Co-Brand (2 ft. allowed, 3.0 ft. and 2.5 ft. proposed) and total number (two allowed, three proposed including Seasons, Corner Market, and Co-Brand); 3. Section 303.5.5.2 – attached structure signs -- height for canopy pectens (2 ft. allowed, 3.0 ft. proposed); 4. Section 303.5.5.2 – attached structure signs – EV charging stations (2x) and directional posts; 5. Section 303.5.5.2 – valences above dispensers (similar to those at the existing 446 Station Avenue Shell); and 6. Section 303.3.4 – Video Screens on pumps. The Board is authorized to grant variances where the Board finds that a literal enforcement of the Zoning By-Law would involve substantial financial or practical hardship to the petitioner, that the hardship is owing to circumstances relating to the soil conditions, shape or topography of such land or structures and especially affecting such land or structures, but not affecting generally the zoning district, and desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent or purpose of the Zoning By-Law. 3 The Applicant respectfully submits that a literal enforcement of the Zoning By-Law in connection with the overall redevelopment will result in a substantial practical and economic hardship to the Applicant and that this hardship is owing to unique circumstances relating to the overall nature of the multiple-property redevelopment/development proposal, including the historical development of the nearby, involved properties. The new building on the Property will be set back more than 120 ft. from Station Avenue, the abutment for the Cape Cod Rail Trail bridge screens the entire Property traveling from the south, and the signage to be removed at 446 Station Avenue is pre-existing nonconforming. As Martin Healy and Franklin Stearns, Esqs., discuss in the Massachusetts Zoning Manual, Athe conditions that establish hardship are diverse” (Massachusetts Zoning Manual, Martin R. Healy, Esq. and Franklin G. Stearns, Esq., Supp. 2002, Chapter 9, Section 9.3.2, Page 9-10). Citing a number of court cases, the Zoning Manual discusses further that “’[d]espite the stringency of the hardship requirement generally, where only dimensional variances are involved, even relatively minor ‘hardship’ can justify a variance’” (Id. at 9-15). The Applicant respectfully submits that desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent or purpose of the Zoning By-Law because: 1. The sign package, like the development itself, has been designed and is intended to complement the B1 Commercial District along Station Avenue and augment overall neighborhood aesthetics, safety, and operational flows; 2. The proposed building and structure signs are compatible with the architecture and size of the building and structure (canopy) and are visually and aesthetically beneficial to the site and will not be detrimental to nor derogate from the architectural and natural setting; 3. The proposed signage will be updated from similar signage at the existing property to be decommissioned across the street. The new monument sign (32 sq. ft.) will be similar in size with the pole-based sign at the existing Shell that is being removed (30.56 sq. ft.), 4 but 6.5 ft. shorter in height (current regulations authorize 24 sq. ft. and 12 ft. in height). An example of a similar (though slightly larger) monument sign that the Applicant recently installed at one of its properties has been submitted; 4. Regarding the building and structure (canopy) signage, they will be similar in design (though smaller in size) than the same installed at the Applicant’s facility in South Dennis; 5. This facility will contain EV charging stations as noted on the plans; 6. The proposed valences above the dispensers are similar to the same being relocated from across the street at the existing Shell Station. The requested video screens on the pumps are new; 7. The proposal will not create any nuisance, hazard or congestion to vehicular or pedestrian traffic nor harm to public safety, welfare, comfort or convenience of the community. To the contrary, the proposal is an integral part of the overall site redevelopment that will assist in achieving improved identification, safety, and efficiency at the Property; and 8. There will be no negative change in artificial light, noise, litter, and odor. For all of the above reasons, the Applicant respectfully requests that the Board of Appeals make a finding that the statutory criteria for the requested relief are met and grant a variance to allow the proposed signs as shown on the submitted plans.