HomeMy WebLinkAboutBuilding Dept Staff ReportDate March 8, 2024
To: Zoning Board of Appeals
From: Robin Anderson, Code Compliance Manager
Re: Staff Report / Appeal # 2024-006
Locus 566 Yarmouth Road Map 344 Parcel 076-001
Owner: 518-556 Yarmouth Road LLC
T518-556 Yarmouth Road LLC is appealing the determination and Notice of Violation issued by
the Building Division on 1/19/24. The violation concerns the lighting provision that outlines
portions of the building along its borders.
The Notice of Violation refers to:
Chapter 240 §61 C - Prohibited Signs
C. Any display lighting by strings or tubes of lights, including lights which outline any part of a
building or which are affixed to any ornamental portion thereof, except that temporary
traditional holiday decorations of strings of small lights shall be permitted between November
15 and January 15 of the following year. Such temporary holiday lighting shall be removed by
January 15.
The appellant claims the tube of lights outlining the sections of the subject building do not
constitute a sign and is not intended to serve as a sign.
The ordinance defines a sign as follows:
Chapter 240 §60 Definitions
SIGN: Any permanent or temporary structure, light, letter, word, model, banner, pennant,
insignia, trade flag, representation or any other device which is used to advertise, inform or
attract the attention of the public and which is designed to be seen from outside a building,
including all signs in windows or doors but not including window displays of merchandise.
The appellant argues that signs are intended to attract attention. We agree. This property is
prominently situated on a main throughfare leading directly to and from the commercial village
of Hyannis. If the intention of this lighting provision is not to serve as sign and to specifically not
attract attention, the appellant would not be before the Board on this occasion.
Outlining the building’s face with tubes of light certainly garners the attention of motor vehicle
traffic traveling on Yarmouth Road; this appears to be the true intent and purpose of outlining
the building with such an illuminating device.
Consideration must also be given to the prescribed methods of analysis when determining the
area of a sign. The ordinance section is specific.
Chapter 240 §62 Determination of area of a sign
A. The area of the sign shall be considered to include all lettering, wording and accompanying
designs and symbols, together with the background, whether open or enclosed , on which
they are displayed.
B. The area of signs painted upon or applied to a building shall include all lettering, wording and
accompanying designs or symbols together with any background of a different color than the
finish material or the building face.
The staff review of sign permit applications often requires drawing a framework around a
proposed sign where none exists. This action assists in defining the area of the proposed sign
and its compliance with the governing size restrictions. In this case, the tubular lighting acts as
the frame requiring the open background to be factored into the calculation. This section of
ordinance has been applied in this manner for 30+ years.
The appellant also argues that the lighting provision was depicted on the construction plan and
as such was approved by virtue of the issued building permit. It should be noted that the
inspectors do not typically review construction plans for aesthetics or signage. Separate permits
are always required for signage even if depicted on the original construction plan . Signage may
be altered, changed or relocated at the conclusion of the project so sign permits are reviewed
for compliance separately. The tubular lighting provision was not identified during the sign
package review.
If the Board is inclined to allow this appeal, every dealership will seek to utilize this provision,
including those that abut residential communities. The approval of this appeal seems
inconsistent with the community’s efforts to preserve the unique characteristics of Cape Cod.
Staff respectfully requests that the Board uphold the determination of the Assistant Director of
Inspectional Services and deny the appeal presented on behalf of 518-556 Yarmouth Road, LLC.
Respectfully Submitted,
Robin Anderson
Code Compliance Manager