https://sleepyhollow.localarchives.org/files/original/9e25942e997ff70b3aa6c18c091649df.pdf f59b8cd6be652483dc4df21adaa9947f PDF Text Text Village of Sleepy Hollow Architectural Review Board Meeting - APPROVED November 28, 2 0 1 2 The meeting was called to order at 8:17p.m by Sean McCarthy. Present: Sean McCarthy (Village of Sleepy Hollow/Building Department) Krista Callaghan Also Present: Mary Gerlanc (Recording Secretary) Announcements - There were no announcements. Proposed Agenda: 1) Approval of Minutes 2 ) CRAS Real Estate Corp. 1) Approval of Minutes 3 8 Beekman Avenue September 26, 2 0 1 2 October 24, 2 0 1 2 New Application September 26, 2 0 1 2 & October 24, 2 0 1 2 The Board approved the amended minutes of September 26, 2012 and October 24, 2012. 2 ) CRAS Real Estate Corp. 3 8 Beekman Avenue New Application Maria Solari, Mirella McNulty & Rosalyn Ferrera represented this application. Mr. McCarthy stated the Board did receive the mailings that notice was given to the other property owners. He stated that this was an application for a portable sign. The Board viewed a photo of the proposed sign. Mr. McCarthy read a response received from Rob Solari, owner of this property, regarding the placement of the sign, style and size of lettering for the proposed sign. Mr. Solari wrote that the letter style would be bold and the sign has no borders, no graphics, and no logos. The sign is a plastic black frame, 43-inches high and 26-inches wide. All letters are plastic, 5-inches in height with one-inch spacing. The sign will not be lit. The sign will be �placed on the property. Mr. Solari stated it is a portable sign that can be taken in and out every day. Maria Solari stated the biggest reason for this type of sign is that they cannot just put the name of the business on the sign because it does not tell the customer what kind of business it is. Mr. McCarthy asked the name of the business. Mirella McNulty stated the business name was the New York Refinery. The applicant stated the name alone would not let customers know they could sell gold at this business. The applicant is upset that they have not had any gold sales since the portable sign has been taken off the property. Mr. McCarthy stated the Village is not saying this business cannot have a sign. He stated the Board is abiding by the Village of Sleepy Hollow sign ordinance, which states how many signs can be on a property, the types and styles of signs and where they can be placed. He stated the sign the applicant is proposing presents a problem. Mr. McCarthy stated this sign was teetering on top of the wall on the property for a while. The Village requested it be removed. Mr. McCarthy stated the Village could be sued if someone walked by and was hit by the sign. Discussion ensued about various municipalities and their sign ordinances. Mr. McCarthy stated the applicant should create a sign that is more desirable and abides by the sign ordinance. Mirella McNulty, who works in the New York Refinery, asked if the applicant could propose the creation of a Village ordinance to allow a "sandwich sign" that could be placed on the sidewalk but conform to approved specifications and dimensions. Mr. McCarthy agreed that the applicant could submit a proposal to amend the sign ordinance. Maria Solari stated that the property owner could not afford to replace the $9600 sign that already was approved and installed at 38 Beekman Avenue. She stated the current sign does not help business. Maria Solari stated the sign does not work because it cannot be read from far away. She also stated the business name alone does not bring in business. The $200 portable sign has brought in all the business. Discussion ensued regarding the location of a sign on the sidewalk. Sean McCarthy stated neither the Architectural Review Board nor the Building Department have the right to authorize the placement of a sign on any Village sidewalk. He stated the applicant would have to appeal to the Board of Trustees to get a licensing agreement to place a Architectural Review Board Meeting, November 28, 2 0 1 2 - APPROVED 2 �sign on the sidewalk. Mr. McCarthy stated the applicant would need indemnification and insurance in case of any accidents. Mr. McCarthy stated it is a constant enforcement issue to keep these signs off the sidewalks and the Board appreciated the applicant coming before the Board and trying to get approval for a sign. However, he stated it was the consensus of the Architectural Review Board that a plastic sign with removable letters is not appropriate for a building the applicant has spent money fixing. Krista Callaghan stated that when she received this application, she read the Village Code pertaining to signs. Based on the Village Code and the Downtown Revitalization Design Guidelines she did not feel the sign fit in. Discussion ensued regarding other businesses on Beekman Avenue and the buildings and signs that had been redone and approved by the Board. Maria Solari asked what kind of sign the Board would allow. Sean McCarthy stated the Board would allow a sign that was more appropriate in materials and design and was a more permanent solution then a portable, plastic sign. He also stated the Board would allow the applicant to have a temporary sign while they make a more permanent solution. Rosalyn Ferrera asked if the sign could be A-frame sign that the property owner could stand on their wall. Sean McCarthy suggested the applicant redo their building directory. Maria Solari stated Rob Solari would not put any more money into the directory because it was not descriptive of the business. Krista Callaghan stated that Village code did not permit businesses to advertise their services on a sign. She also stated that the applicant had a neon sign on the property window. Maria Solari stated they had a building permit for that neon sign. Sean McCarthy stated that the permit was granted for that additional sign to help the business advertise their services. Discussion ensued about neon signs on Beekman Avenue and how many are allowed per window. Maria Solari stated they have limited budget and are not going to be able to build on to their existing sign. Krista Callaghan stated that the applicant should put the name of the businesses in the building underneath the current sign on the property. She stated it should be presented as a legitimate business in that building. She also stated she drove into the parking lot and didn't know where the business was located in the building and not because the building is set back from the street. Architectural Review Board Meeting, November 28, 2 0 1 2 - APPROVED 3 �Maria Solari showed photos of the property and stated that the signs can't be read from the street. Sean McCarthy stated the applicant is allowed in addition to the directory, a large awning for Studio 38, signs above every business and signs in the windows. Sean McCarthy stated the applicant has been permitted for the awning with the oversize lettering, which was not approved, and then a sign above every storefront and also signs in the windows and a directory sign. Maria Solari stated it should be the right of a business owner to have signs. Discussion ensued regarding the appropriateness of various types of signs. Mr. McCarthy stated the Village has already established guidelines for signs and the portable, plastic sign the applicant was using does not follow the guidelines. He stated the sign the applicant made several years ago kept to the guidelines. Maria Solari stated that sign was a waste of money because it does not work. It is not functional. Krista Callaghan asked if the other businesses on the property are doing well. Maria Solari stated it was hard to keep businesses on the property and one of the empty spaces has not been rented for three years. Discussion ensued. Sean McCarthy stated that the sign should not make or break the business. Maria Solari disagreed and stated that since their portable sign was not on the sidewalk they haven't had business in three weeks at New York Refinery. Sean McCarthy suggested the applicant add something to their current signs to advertise the business. Maria Solari stated no one would be able to read it. Sean McCarthy stated they could read the neon sign in the window. Rosalyn Ferrera stated the business is only open during the day so the neon sign cannot be seen. Sean McCarthy asked if the applicant could incorporate lighting on their sign. Rosalyn Ferrera asked if they would be allowed to do that. Mr. McCarthy and Ms. Callaghan said yes. Discussion ensued about rules and regulations regarding businesses. Sean McCarthy asked the applicant how many businesses were sharing one space. Maria Solar stated two businesses. Mr. McCarthy stated the Village has allowed this, which is a violation. He also stated the Village allowed the applicant to have a Gold sign, which was put up without a permit. He also stated the applicant put up their portable sign without a permit and the Village is trying to cooperate with the applicant. Discussion ensued about what the Village of Sleepy Hollow ordinances allow. Sean McCarthy stated that Village code says plastic lettering is not allowed on a sign. Krista Callaghan suggested the applicant should have come with pictures of signs the applicant has seen in other villages to show the Architectural Review Board some creative solutions besides the plastic sign they were using. Architectural Review Board Meeting, November 28, 2 0 1 2 - APPROVED 4 �Rosalyn Ferrara asked if the big objection to the plastic sign was its' location on the wall. Sean McCarthy stated the sign couldn't be on the wall. Discussion ensued about where the sign could be placed on the property. Rosalyn Ferrara asked if a different style A-frame sign could be placed on the approved area of the applicant's property. Sean McCarthy suggested the applicant do research on what other municipalities allow in terms of A-frame signs. Krista Callaghan suggested they keep in mind what kind of sign is already above the new one they need to design and how do they relate to each other without necessarily going to the same expense as the original sign. Mirella McNulty stated they found that a sign that has a white background with black lettering stands out the most. Discussion ensued about the A-frame style sign. Sean McCarthy stated this style sign has never been approved in the Village. He suggested the applicant design a sign that is the opposite of the colors they have already used. He suggested using gold paint instead of gold leafing. Mr. McCarthy also suggested hanging the sign underneath the one already in place. He stated the sign could have the name of the business and then the words "We Buy Gold" in six-inch letters underneath. He suggested using a gold background with black lettering that ties in with the applicant's original sign. He also suggested having spotlight installed to shine upon the sign and spotlight the gold. Mr. McCarthy stated the Village would allow the applicant to display their portable plastic sign while they come up with a compromise solution. Rosalyn Ferrera stated it was important for this business that the sign be descriptive and also the placement of the sign. Discussion ensued about the area the sign should be located and the landscaping of that area on the property. Sean McCarthy stated if the area was landscaped and the sign was there and it was lit then it would look finished. He stated that if the applicant used the parameters they already had in place, they could have a much bigger sign with bigger lettering. Currently, they have 5-inch lettering but they could go 6-inch or even 8-inch lettering to fill up the area. Rosalyn Ferrera asked if the Board had a problem with a white background for the sign. Krista Callaghan stated she had no problem with the lighter background that Mr. McCarthy suggested but it needs to be more consistent with the colors the applicant has already used. Mr. McCarthy suggested they use a gold background with a black border and blue or black lettering so it goes with what the applicant already has but still stands out. Krista Callaghan said the simplicity of stating "We Buy Gold" is all that people need to notice on the sign. Maria Solari asked if they could drill the sign into the wall. Architectural Review Board Meeting, November 28, 2 0 1 2 - APPROVED 5 �Sean McCarthy stated they would have to look at where the property line ends but they could if it was on their property. The sign would just have to be in an area that doesn't block the view of cars pulling in and out of the property. Discussion ensued about installing a sign that wouldn't be mobile. Krista Callaghan stated that even if the sign were drilled into the wall it should be consistent with the other signs on the property. Mr. McCarthy stated the sign couldn't take away room from a parking space. Maria Solari asked if it was possible to mount the sign on a wooden post on the wall located on the property. Sean McCarthy stated he would not recommend using wood because it wouldn't last very long. Maria Solari asked if they could use a black, iron post instead. Sean McCarthy agreed that was possible. Maria Solari asked for some time to get the new signage together. Mirella McNulty asked if Rob Solari could meet with Sean to discuss new ideas. Sean McCarthy agreed that Mr. Solari could meet with him and discuss possible scenarios for the sign. Discussion ensued about possible ideas or choices for signage and lighting for signage. Krista Callaghan asked if the business was open at night. Maria Solari said no. Rosalyn Ferrara stated that if the sign were lit, then people at night would also notice it. Sean McCarthy stated the Board could grant a 30-day temporary sign. Krista Callaghan stated that would get them through the holidays. Sean McCarthy suggested the temporary sign could stay until January 1st and the applicant should have an alternative proposal to show the Board by that date. He stated the Board could then grant another extension. Maria Solari asked if the temporary sign could be placed on bricks in another location in the parking lot. Mr. McCarthy stated they just couldn't block any parking spots. Mr. McCarthy also pointed out that portable signs must be maintained so if a storm arises then the owner must remove the sign. Maria Solari asked about the colors Mr. McCarthy suggested. He stated using gold as the background with dark blue or black lettering. Mr. McCarthy suggested starting with the size and location of the sign before the colors. He also suggested the applicant think about putting New York Refinery -We Buy Gold and then an emblem in the middle of the sign. Rosalyn Ferrara suggested a hand painted sign. Sean McCarthy suggested changing the shape of the sign from rectangle to an oval. The meeting was adjourned at 8:55pm. Architectural Review Board Meeting, November 28, 2 0 1 2 - APPROVED 6 � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Architectural Review Board Minutes-2012 Text A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource MINS_ARB_2012-11-28 Subject The topic of the resource Architectural Review Board Minutes-2012 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2012 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Village of Sleepy Hollow All Rights Reserved. Type The nature or genre of the resource Text