Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Signage Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves variance for oversized attached sign at 121 Route 6A
Summary
The Yarmouth Board of Appeals granted a variance to allow an attached gable sign to remain at 121 Route 6A despite exceeding the bylaw height limit (installed ~46 in vs. 24 in allowed); the board cited lot/building characteristics and potential financial hardship of removing the sign.
The board voted unanimously April 23 to approve a variance allowing an attached gable sign at 121 Route 6A to remain despite exceeding the local zoning height limit.
Joseph Scott, a partial owner of Capen Island Signs, told the board the sign letters (acrylic/studded individual letters) were installed after Old Kings Highway had approved the design, and the company later learned it exceeded the allowed maximum (the submitted measurements showed approximately 46 inches tall on the gable versus a 24-inch maximum). Scott said the previous owner handled permitting and that the letters were chosen to be legible from the road.
Board members examined the installation photos and rendering, discussed whether the petitioner acted intentionally, and weighed compliance against the cost of removing and replacing the sign. Several members said they did not believe there was intent to flout the rules and that a financial hardship (estimated removal/replacement costs of several thousand dollars) and the building/lot shape supported variance criteria. "Mistakes can be made," one member said, and another noted Old Kings Highway had previously approved the building changes in a related review.
Anthony moved to approve the variance as requested; the motion was seconded and passed by roll call, 4–0 (Anthony — yes; Barbara — yes; John — yes; Chair Sean Igo — yes). The petitioner was instructed to file the written decision with the town clerk and, after the 20-day appeal period, record it at the registry of deeds and return a recorded copy to the board. The petitioner requested withdrawal without prejudice of the duplicate special-permit request; the board approved that withdrawal unanimously.
The board said the approval rested on the lot and building configuration and the cost burden of removal rather than an endorsement to install oversized signage elsewhere; any future, similar installations would require separate review.
