Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors urge enforcement after animated LED sign installed at Shriners building in Puxa Village
Summary
Residents and the Puxa Village Association presented a packet with 147 signatures saying a newly installed animated LED sign at the Shriners building exceeds zoning rules for a historic residential area; the inspections division has cited the owner and given a last chance prior to municipal court.
At a June 15 Cranston City Council meeting, residents and neighborhood leaders asked the city to enforce its sign and zoning rules after the installation of an animated LED sign at the Shriners building in Puxa Village.
Jonathan Stevens, a Puxa Village resident and municipal planner, presented a packet to the council alleging the sign was permitted in error and exceeds allowable dimensions in a residential zone. Stevens said the application shows a digital panel and that "This sign is 30 square feet," while the residential maximum is six square feet and digital signs are not allowed without a zoning waiver. Stevens said he submitted a petition signed by 147 citizens and a visual-impact analysis and asked the city to enforce the code.
The council voted to enter Stevens’s packet into the record. The communications director said the building-inspections division has cited the property and given the owner a last chance before municipal court enforcement.
Representatives of the Puxa Village Association told the council they support the Shriners’ charitable work but are concerned about precedent in the national historic district and want a collaborative solution. Frank Tamashi, secretary of Rhode Island Kindness Charities Trust (the owner of the building), said AA Sign pulled permits, that the sign is "less than 16 square ft," and that it was installed because the old wooden sign’s posts were rotting. Tamashi told the council the sign changes every 60 seconds, shuts off at 9 p.m., and is not flashing.
Multiple neighbors described the sign as bright and disruptive; one resident said it initially ran 24/7 and now turns off at 9 p.m. Neighbors requested that the city subject the installation to the appropriate approval process or require the sign be replaced with a compliant design.
The council’s immediate action was to enter the petition and related materials into the record and note that inspections had issued citations. The matter may return to committee or municipal enforcement depending on the inspections and legal process.
