Text · page 6 of 11
DRAFT Chairman Ms. Rood: We are moving on to the next Petition #652 Mark Witkowski- 7376 Boston State Road seeking an area variance of 16 inches to the top of the sign and 35 inches to bottom of sign for a variable message center per the Town of Boston Code 2019-2 Section 2.1. We had this on the agenda last month, but there was an error in the letter. He was unaware of the hearing. We are revisiting this hearing because proper notification was made. We went over everything last month. Just some of the highlights included from our planning consultant Sarah Desjardins regarding petition # 652 – Mark Witkowski, who is requesting an area variance for a variable message sign at 7376 Boston State Road. This action is classified as a type 2 action and therefore is not subject to review under SEQR. Also, regarding the sign, it came to our attention that he received the letter from the Code Enforcement Officer back in 2024. It was highlighted on the letter what was allowed. It advised the applicant that the total size of the message board was not to exceed 24 square feet with the intensity and operation times and a maximum of three feet allowed to the bottom of the sign. A planter of maximum height of 7 feet unless the planter is at the base and maximum height is 9 feet with setbacks. The message must not change for two hours. No animation. He needed to produce a full rendition and submit it with an application for approval. The Code Enforcement Officer at the time was Thomas Murphy and that was dated August 22, 2024. He installed the sign without approval. So, I think that was the gist of everything we talked about last month. Chairman Ms. Rood: made a motion to open the public hearing and Mr. Ballard seconded the motion. Vote Taken: Ms. Zylinski Yes [X] No [ ] Mr. Ballard Yes [X] No [ ] Mr. May Yes [X] No [ ] Ms. Pryor Yes [X] No [ ] Chairman Ms. Rood Yes [X] No [ ] Attorney Kevin Rautenstrauch from Attea & Attea: I am appearing on behalf of Mr. Witkowski, who is the owner of Southtowns Feeds and Needs. There is an area variance application in front of the Board to allow the sign to exceed the 9-foot allowance in the signage code and to fall short of the requirement for the bottom of signage as measured from the planting box. You have referenced the letter of August 22, 2024 that was sent to Mr. Witkowski by Mr. Murphy the Code Enforcement. After that letter, Mr. Witkowski applied for the permit to conduct the work which was granted in October with this being paid for that in January 2025. Mr. Reed visited the property in I believe in August 2025, citing Mr. Witkowski for the violations that I mentioned previously, along with two others that it is my understanding have since been taken care of. Many of you are familiar with the sign. It is on Boston State Road. The current sign replaces in essence the sign that existed there since at least 1993 with the modification that the sign has the LED instead of the manual facade. The purpose of having it raised higher than what ordinarily permitted under the code is that based on his location on Boston State Road, in the winter months anything that would be only 3 feet off the ground would be covered by the snowplow on the side of the road. In addition, he is permitted to have products beyond the sign on his property, which cover any lower signs as well. The request that has been made is the permission through the granting of the area variance that the sign be permitted to remain as is. I do acknowledge the letter from August of 2024 but again, the subsequent application for the building permit was in fact granted based on the drawing submitted. This was in October with the fee paid in January of 2025. I guess for a standpoint I’ll leave it now. Ms. Pryor: This feels a lot like do it and then ask for forgiveness later. Can you maybe talk to us through how that's not from your perspective? Because from our perspective, that's what it feels like. Attorney Rautenstrauch: My client said the old Code Enforcement Officer said that he received the required building permit. He submitted the drawings and from his standpoint he was unaware that there was anything missing. Obviously when Mr. Reed came and informed him of issues that existed, I think he made attempts to