The Board charged with providing advice to Planning and Zoning about the design of signs and other traits which define our city visited The Galleria on Middle Street yesterday. The fieldtrip was to view a small sample L.E.D. sign, as part of their deliberations on a proposal for a 300 square feet illuminated sign on this property, facing I91 near the Country Club Road exit.
Gerry Martorelli, owner of The Galleria, told the DRPB that financial hardship necessitated the sign to pull motorists into his business. Martorelli arranged for Bill Smiley to be on site with a 3' X 8' version of the L.E.D. sign. Sign salesman Smiley cited 70,000 single cars that drive by the site on I91 every day, touting the benefits that such signs bring to retail businesses.
The sign would replace a current sign adjacent to the Country Club Road exit sign on I91.
7 comments:
"Sign salesman Smiley cited 70,000 single cars that drive by the site on I91 every day, touting the benefits that such signs bring to retail businesses."
Do we really want 70,000 drivers a day distracted by that sign? And if this is touted as a solution for retail business, what are they doing operating in an area not zoned for retail? Don't they need a variance from zoning? Can't have it both ways, guys. Are you retail or not?
There is more retail around in the area than zoning even knows or is not enforcing. Lets have restaurants too.
The Galleria has a special variance from p&z allowing the business. That is not a decision up for debate by the design board, only the sign is.
So this is what will happen. The billboard (notice they keep calling it a "sign")will be approved. Then when zoning begins questioning why they are operating as a retail operation, they will request a variance because they just spent all this money on a billboard and it would be a financial hardship.
Whatever has become of the olde Middletown ordinance that prohibited off-site signs and required that signs affixed to buildings not extend more than 6" from the face of the building? I recall the hassles that befell Shapiro's years ago as well as G.U.Reed's TV shop on Washington St.
If that ordinance still exists, how does it allow all the exterior (sidewalk) dining that is so prevalent these days?
A financial hardship is NOT grounds for a variance by ZBAs. This has been well established in CT court law. That said, ZBAs normally don't give a hoot about court decisions and continue to hand out variances like halloween candy. And P&Zs rarely take their own ZBAs to court for ignoring State statute and local regs.That would require legal fees to sue another town agency. [ Of course here in Middletown , all bets are off when it involves the BOE and City Hall]
Why don't some of you show up at a p&z or design board meeting and voice your concerns?
Post a Comment