Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Signage Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bolton ZBA debates canopy signage variance for 271 Hop River Road
Summary
At its Nov. 8 meeting the Bolton Zoning Board of Appeals heard an application from owner Asif Choudhry seeking a variance to allow signage on a rebuilt canopy at 271 Hop River Road; members debated whether replacing a nonconforming canopy preserves its nonconforming status and urged a traffic study and P&Z review.
The Bolton Zoning Board of Appeals on Nov. 8 heard an application from property owner Asif Choudhry seeking a variance to allow signage on a new canopy at 271 Hop River Road.
Chairman Mark Altermatt said the board must consider whether rebuilding a nonconforming structure would forfeit its nonconforming status and reminded members that the zoning regulations limit signage on structural canopies: "18D of the zoning regulations prohibits signage on structural canopies," he said.
Gregg Fedus of Fedus Engineering described cleanup and redevelopment plans for the former gas-station site, saying tanks and debris have been removed, new tanks installed, and a new building and canopy will be erected perpendicular to the road to improve site layout. Fedus and the applicant said the old canopy's CITGO signage was painted over nearly a decade ago and that a freestanding sign already displays pricing information. Fedus also noted the applicant proposes 184 square feet of signage area compared with 250 square feet allowed under Bolton signage regulations.
Several members raised safety and sight-line concerns. Board members heard that the posted speed in that stretch is 45 mph and that observed speeds average about 57–58 mph; the applicant's engineers said they planned to present a traffic and line-of-sight study to the Planning & Zoning (P&Z) commission the next evening after technical difficulties prevented submission that night.
Member William Anderson argued the nonconforming use belongs to the land and may persist when ownership changes. Altermatt responded that a nonconforming structure generally may not be torn down and reconstructed with the same nonconforming status without ZBA approval and said evidence of intent to abandon the nonconforming use could affect the outcome.
Applicant Asif Choudhry said he had cleaned the site and that P&Z had previously approved the new building plans in April 2022. "I would appreciate the ZBA's approval on this project," Choudhry said, asking the board to consider the improvements already made.
Board members advised the applicant to consider withdrawing the ZBA application and seeking either P&Z approval for canopy signage on safety grounds or to present the requested traffic study to P&Z; the applicant's representative requested a continuance of the ZBA public hearing to December or January. No variance was granted or denied at the Nov. 8 meeting.
The board did not take a formal vote on the variance application that evening; P&Z review and any additional evidence the applicant submits were left as the next procedural steps.
