Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Signs topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Sign company seeks variances for Broadway hotel building; board asks for comparables

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A business requested height and area variances for wall signs at 125 S. Broadway. The applicant acknowledged two existing signs and asked for a second-story wall sign due to vegetation obstructing sightlines; the board asked for nearby comparables and continued the hearing to April 11.

On March 24 the Zoning Board of Appeals reviewed a request for sign variances at 125 South Broadway, including an increase of permitted letter/logo height from 18 to 20 inches and an increase of allowed sign area from 12 to 14.5 square feet. The applicant also requested permission to place a wall sign above the first floor of a multi-story building in the T5 district.

Adam Wakulenko of Adirondack Sign Company said two of the signs already exist and will be refaced; the challenging element is a second-floor sign the applicant says must sit high on the façade to be visible from the southbound approach on Broadway because vegetation blocks lower sightlines. Wakulenko said the site offers “only one vantage point” from which the building can be seen and that lowering the sign would make it invisible from the main approach.

Board members requested comparables in the same downtown corridor. Otis Maxwell and Amanda Denham asked for photographic evidence and comparables on Broadway near Lincoln, including recent hotel construction at Lincoln and Broadway, to show whether second-floor signs exist in the same zoning district (T5) and historic/architectural review context. Jonah Cohen and others suggested Homewood Suites and Treehouse Brewing as visual comparables but emphasized the need to document their zoning context; the applicant agreed to submit comparables and lighting details and return on April 11.

No vote was taken; the board kept the public hearing open and asked the applicant to submit photographic comparables, documentation from nearby recent projects (including the Hilton Garden Inn development), and details on sign lighting and timers if the board should condition hours of illumination.