HomeMy WebLinkAboutDecision 2782 928 Route 28FILED WITH TOWN CLERK
HEARING DATE:
PETITION NO:
PETITIONER:
TOWN OF YARMOUTH
BOARD OF APPEALS
DECISION
�rN 2244� jj
October 11,
2782
P
REC:FJVED
90 OCT 22' A» :1
19 'NH CLERK & TREASU
fiflr
Kenneth Alty '
D/B/A Bikes'N' More
PROPERTY LOCATED AT: 928 Route 28, South Yarmouth,
MA 02664 and shown on Assessor's Map #35 as Parcel #W3.
PETITIONER REQUESTSi A Variance from the terms
of the Yarmouth Zoning By -Law to allow a free standing sign,
a soda machine, to be located in the front of the building.
A Variance from Section 303.4.5.2 of the By -Law is necesary.
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD PRESENT AND VOTING: Leslie Campbell
(Chairman), Fritz Lindquist, David Reid, Joyce Sears, Roger
Tuttle.
It appearing that notice of said hearing has been given by
sending notice thereof to the petitioner and all those owners
of property deemed by the Board to be affected thereby and
that public notice of such hearing having been given by
publication in the Yarmouth Sun, the hearing was opened and
held on the date first above written.
REASONS FOR DECISION
The Petitioner's business is located within a Business Center.
In front of his building is located a "7-Up" coin -operated
vending machine, which has the proudct's name and logo on
the front and both sides. The Building Inspector's office
has determined that this constitutes a "free standing sign",
as defined in Seciton 303.1 of the Sign Code By -Law, which
is not permitted at this site. No sign permit has been issued
for the sign and no appeal has been taken from the inspector's
determination. The Petitioner now seeks a Variance from
Section 303.4.5.2 to allow the machine to remain in the present
location.._.__.�._._--.---___...__.
The Petitioner, Mr. Kenneth Alty, appeared at the hearing
with Mr. Bob Mayo, a representative of the local distributor
of the machine. In addition to the Petitioner's presentation,
.A
including photographs of the premises and sketch plans of
the site, the Board received a report from the Sign Design
Review Board (along with minutes of their meeting) and a letter
from the Route 28 Task Force. No one else appeared in favor
nor in opposition. The Building Inspector, Mr. Forrest White,
did appear to respond to questions of the Board.
The members of the Board expressed concern about the —
application of the sign code to such vending machines and
similar devices, and felt that such application may not have
been envisioned by the drafters of the Sign Code.
Nevertheless, the code (section 303.1) defines a "Sign" to
include "Any device, emblem, lettering, lighting, banner,
flag or other symbol or object temporary or permanent, designed
to advertise a product or service or to attract attention
of persons not on the premises on which the signs are lcoated".
There is no dispute by the Petitioner that the vending machine
is intended to, and does, attract people to the machine itself
and to his business. Nor is there any dispute that the site
is a Business Center which already has a free-standing sign.
While the Petitioner does present evidence of financial
hardship were the machine ordered removed, with which the
Board is sympathetic, the hardship is not particular to this
business, this site nor this sign but is instead the result
of the application of the code restrictions to such signs,
wherever they may be found. The Board therefore, finds that
the criteria for a Variance have not been met.
A motion was made by Mr. Lindquist and seconded by Mr. Reid,
to deny the Petition. Mr. Campbell, Mr. Tuttle, Mr.
Lindquist and Mr. Reid voted in favor of the motion, Mrs.
Sears abstained from voting. The motion to deny therefore
carried.
The Variance requested is therefore denied.
L
David S. eid
Clerk
r
M
�w
M
rn
fnv
4F1