- 414 Main Street (Owl Shop)
- 154 Main Street (Elwood Adams)
- 240 Main Street (Barry Krock)
- 37 Pleasant Street (Paul Saleba)
- 64 Water Street (Komenos family)
It is non-accesory since the sign could advertise products and services that had nothing to do with the business inside; for example,the Owl Shop wall could have a picture of a model with Calvin Klein underwear. The Worcester Sign Company would find people who would want to advertise on the space and obivously pay a rent or a percentage of the advertising fee with the owner of the property.
To be honest, I was not sure and still not sure where I stand on this. One of the problems, as board member Abramoff pointed out, it was hard to tell how big the signs would be in relation to the wall. The long and the short of it was all the permit requests mainly because it to manage and protect the character of its downtown. It was also pointed out at the meeting that these large signs could be a distraction and cause traffic problems.
I don't necessarily disagree, but I have one question. Why then is it o'kay to have non-accessory signage on the DCU Center?
6 comments:
Bill, did you intend to say all the permit req's got shot down w/o prejudice or left pending for lack of a better term?
The ZBA is trying to protect and manage ther character of downtown. SURELY THEY JEST! What Caharcter. More like a host of undesirable characterS. Variances and special permits for low income housing that brings all kinda of human debris to teh downtown are always rubber stamped by the ZBA downtown and the ZBA is now worried about signs's affecting the downtown ambiance? God who's been smoking left handed cigarettes altely?
Cause traffic problems downtown? Again, surely they jest. We could only wish that we had real traffic problems downtown. Only traffic problems I ever hear of are
a. one Sunday night every mid-August and
b. 4TH July weekend after which my Goodyear stock always rises.
DCU non- accessory signage allowed b/c:
a. grandfathered from the days of teh Centrum?
b. previoulsly obtained variance or special permit?
c. the city still owns the property (I think ?) and city property is exempt from the zoning ordinance?
Jahn:
I mean Bill Board. The ZBA actually voted on each petition. They even suggested to the petitioner to withdraw, but the petitioner insisted on a vote?? Di not seem very smart to me either.....
Jahn, I believe you are right. Public buildings are exempt from any ordinance.
Is it just me or does it seem kind of strange that the City puts non-accesory signs on their buildings downtown, but then does not think it is a good idea for anyone else.
Question.. What if I sold naming right to my building? COuld they then put a non-accessory sign up??
Bill
Bill, what was req'ed last night? Varainces or Special permits?
If SP's then I can see why they didnt withdraw. Look for an appeal filings w/in 20 days. SP's are 10,000% easier to win in court than variances as 99.99% of variances that are granted are illegal..but if no abutters yap or the abuterers are satified then ZBA's will most often grant variance request. as I am sure you know the citreria to leaglly obtian a SP are much less stringent than to obtian a variabce.
Note the above general rules do not apply if you"re in the non profit low housing business.
Kind alook slike these folks were trying to get somethigns in before a deadline or maratorium arises?
Is Worc's Bill board industry being:
a Paris Cinema'ed
b. Tennis courted
c. Vendor push cart'ed
d. Airport'ed
e. all of the above
Anyone sense a bit of a trend here?
Tell Signman Sr. to come in outta the sno and give us his take on whats going down here?
Jahn:
I am confused on this, but I believe they requested special permit.
Bill
I woulda guessed SP too b/c use variances are no longer allowed unless you're in an overlay district......check me on that though.
I got 3 boxes of Girl Scout Cookies that says if you call Dave's wedding chapel in 20 days... that appeals will have been filed.
very busy day will comment tomorrow
signman Sr.
Post a Comment