197-15-A APPLICANT – Slater & Beckerman, P.C., for Mihata Corp., owner; Colossal Media, lessee. SUBJECT – Application August 25, 2015 – Determination made by Department of Buildings Technical Affairs that under ZR 42-561 a proposed advertising sign, comprising 750 sq. ft. of surface area, may not be located at the premises, facing a Special Mixed Use District (M1-1)/R6A zoning district. PREMISES AFFECTED – 32 Berry Street, northwest 12th corner of the intersection of Berry Street and North Street, Block 2283, Lot 38, Borough of Brooklyn. COMMUNITY BOARD #3BK ACTION OF THE BOARD – Appeal Denied. THE VOTE TO GRANT – Affirmative: Chair Perlmutter and Commissioner Montanez……………......................................................2 Negative: Vice-Chair Hinkson, Commissioner Ottley- Brown and Commissioner Chanda………………….…..3 THE RESOLUTION: WHEREAS, the subject appeal comes before the Board in response to a Final Determination, dated July 27, 2015, by the Department of Buildings (“DOB”) (the “Final Determination”); and WHEREAS, the Final Determination states, in pertinent part: …the proposed advertising sign, located within 100 ft. of the street line, and in fact, 12th directly on the street line of North Street, in which the boundary of the adjoining Residence R6A District is located, and facing directly towards the Residence District boundary at effectively zero degrees away from the Residence District boundary, does not comply with ZR 42-561 and is, therefore, not allowed; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on this appeal on February 23, 2016, after due notice by publication in The City Record, and then to decision on May 17, 2016; and WHEREAS, Vice-Chair Hinkson, Commissioner Montanez, Commissioner Ottley-Brown, and Commissioner Chanda performed inspections of the subject Site and neighborhood; and WHERAS, this appeal is filed on behalf of Colossal Media, (the “Appellant”), which seeks to lease sign space at 32 Berry Street; the Appellant contends that DOB’s issuance of the Final Determination was erroneous; and WHEREAS, DOB and the Appellant have been represented by counsel throughout this appeal; and WHEREAS, the subject site is located at the 12th northwest corner of Berry Street and North Street, within an M1-1 zoning district; and WHEREAS, the site has 50 feet of frontage along 12th Berry Street, 100 feet of frontage along North Street, and approximately 5,000 sq. ft. of lot area; and WHEREAS, the site is occupied by two-story industrial and manufacturing building; the Appellant proposes to install on the subject building a non- illuminated advertising sign with an area of 900 sq. ft.; because the sign would be hand-painted it does not require 1 197-15-A modification of the applicable provisions of Sections 32-64 (Surface Area and Illumination Provisions) and 32-65 (Permitted Projection or Height of Signs), provided the Commission finds that such signs are consistent with the character of the surrounding area. However, no modification shall be made to the applicable provisions of Section 32-644 (Illuminated or flashing signs in C4, C5-4, C6 or C7 Districts) relating to flashing signs; and DISCUSSION A. THE APPELLANT’S POSITION WHEREAS, the Appellant asserts that: (1) an MX8 District should be treated as a C6-1 district, not a Residence District and (2) DOB’s Determination leads to an illogical result that there be only a limited amount of accessory signage facing Special Mixed Use Districts while more than twice the amount of accessory signage would be permitted within the district; and 1. The Appellant’s argument that Mixed Use Districts are not Residence Districts WHEREAS, the Appellant asserts that ZR § 42-561 is modified by ZR § 123-40, which provides that in MX districts, “the provisions regulating signs in C6-1 districts shall apply for any sign” so that an MX8 District should be treated as a C6-1 district, not a Residence District and, accordingly ZR § 42-561 should not apply; and WHEREAS, the Appellant asserts t

… (truncated, full text in PDF)