North East business asks town to change sign law

NORTH EAST — Rather than complying with the town’s relatively new zoning ordinance prohibiting internally lit, LED (light emitting diodes) illuminated signs, GRJH, Inc., which owns the Sunoco gasoline station and convenience store on Route 44  East, has requested the Town Board change the law. Attorney J. Keith Nolan represents GRJH, Inc., and its owner,  Sharon businessman Jay Metz. Nolan appeared before the North East Town Board at its meeting on Thursday, Dec. 9.

The request and the law

“What we’re proposing is a change in the language,� the attorney said, adding the sign was installed before the zoning was changed, replacing another sign. “This sign was put up before the law was enacted because there was no site plan approval.�

Planning Board member Leslie Farhangi said later that statement was incorrect.

“There was no sign previously [to the business being there]. That was a completely new site, and before the gas station was built there was a dog groomer there. Everything was new,� she said. “They came before the Planning Board to get approved. Their original sign that they agreed to was not internally lit, but they just built an internally lit sign anyway. It’s illegal and when they built it, it was illegal.�

 Planning Board member Bill Kish, who helped draft the zoning ordinance while on the Zoning Review Committee (ZRC), clarified that the first sign at the Sunoco station had external lighting, but said a year later it was torn out and replaced with an internally lit sign.

“That sign has always been illegal,� he said, describing it as a big-plastic sign more closely associated with a strip mall than a rural town. “It was never approved by the Planning Board or the zoning enforcement officer.�

Litigation and the

requested amendments

“And there were other things they did that were different than their site plan,� Farhangi added. “That’s why the town is in litigation, because GRJH didn’t build the gas station the way they said they were going to in the site plan.�

In fact, this year the town filed a lawsuit against GRJH for its violations. It has asked for an injunction against the business, which is currently operating without a Certificate of Occupancy (CO). Nolan’s appearance last week, however, was strictly to request two zoning changes. He submitted the following proposed amendments:

The first was to amend subsection 2 b 1 of the law by deleting the phrase “not to exceed 25 square feet� in the first sentence thereof and substituting “not to exceed 60 square feet.�

The second was to amend subsection 2 b 1 (a) of the law in its entirety by substituting the following sentence: “The illumination of the monument sign shall not include any video displays or flashing, alternating or animated display elements.�

“I drafted [the amendments] in the narrowest possible way,� Nolan said. “This is what solves the problem for the specific client I represent.�

But the town’s laws shouldn’t be crafted around individual businesses or applicants, according to Kish.

“I think it’s pretty obvious that the matter brought before the board by Mr. Metz’s attorney is strictly for the benefit of one company who has an interest in having their sign remain where it is,� he said. “The Town Board needs to consider what’s best for the town as a whole and I think they will find there’s a lot of resistance to the idea of allowing this type of sign in the town.�

Are LEDs BAD?

Internally lit, LED signs are brighter than other signs, which have external lights shine on them. They also open the door to possible future LED displays including videos, animation or other, more flashy effects.

“The LED-based sign prohibition is not simply designed to prevent LEDs, it’s there to prevent the proliferation of the types of signs that are going to become more and more common in the next few years,� Kish said, citing Route 7 in North Canaan, Conn., as an example of signs run rampant.

“People don’t want strip malls [with those types of signs],� Farhangi said, adding that GRJH tried to get a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA), but was denied; the company subsequently filed an Article 78 lawsuit against the ZBA to overturn that decision. “One of the basics of good planning is that you don’t have internally lit signs.�

“Internally lit signs are distracting and downright ugly,� Kish said. “And there are plenty of alternatives that are more traditional and not as distracting.�

And safer, although Nolan tried to make a case for the Sunoco sign.

“The purpose from GRJH is to have a  bright sign people can read from the road in bad weather,â€� Nolan said. “I don’t understand [the opposition] and it seems to me drivers at night encounter all kinds of lights on the roads. LED lighting is in all of New York state’s traffic lights.â€�

“Their signs are for safety,� town Councilman Dave McGhee said. He noted that it would be unwise to change one thing at a time. “We have to go in steps,� he said. “We can change it, but we’re going to hear all the facts first.�

The big picture,

and it includes the ZRC

Town Supervisor Dave Sherman suggested the board refer the matter to the ZRC, which was in need of being reconstituted. He asked Kish, who was in the audience during last Thursday’s meeting, if its members would still be interested in serving on the volunteer committee. Kish said they would be; he later added it’s important the committee’s work be supported by the town.

“Years worth of work, research, debate and compromise of the ZRC’s seven members, who were appointed by the Town Board, went into that ordinance. And the Town Board supposedly read that legislation as a result of that process and adopted it,� Kish said. “If the board decides the applicant can come in and say, ‘We built a sign we kind of like and will you change the law for me?’ That’s a real perversion of the process and indicates a lack of leadership on the part of the board.�

At last week’s meeting, Planning Board Chairman Henry Klimowicz, who also helped create the zoning ordinance while serving on the ZRC, suggested the board ask Attorney to the Town Warren Replansky about the deficits in the town’s zoning. The Town Board hesitated.

“It’s a big job,� acknowledged Klimowicz.

Sherman agreed and then asked for a motion to refer the zoning amendment request to the Zoning Review Committee; the motion was made and voted for unanimously (Councilman Tim Shaffer was absent from the meeting).

The board then excused itself and went into executive session to discuss legal matters. When it returned it reconstituted the ZRC. Instead of maintaining its seven-members the board changed it to a six-member committee. Sherman will continue to lead the group; he will be joined by town Councilman Carl Stahovec, who will serve alongside returning members Julie Schroeder, Sam Busselle, Ed Downey and Chip Barrett. Previous members Kish and Klimowicz, along with local architect, Ray Nelson, were not reappointed to the ZRC. Kish spoke about that decision the following day.

“Everything in this town is run by politics and who you’re friends with and who you like,� he said. “And I don’t believe I’ve made many friends on the current Town Board.�