88-12-A & 89-12-A APPLICANT – Fried Frank by Richard Esq., Van Wagner Communications, LLC OWNER OF PREMISES – Name Mutual, SUBJECT – Application April 11, 2012 – Appeal determination of the Department of Buildings right to maintain existing advertising signs. zoning district. 11th PREMISES AFFECTED – 462 Avenue, 37th 38th and Streets, Block 709, Lot 3, Manhattan. COMMUNITY BOARD #4M ACTION OF THE BOARD – Appeal Denied. THE VOTE TO GRANT – Affirmative: ......................................................................0 Negative: Chair Srinivasan, Vice Chair Commissioner Ottley-Brown, Commissioner and Commissioner Montanez .......................................5 THE RESOLUTION – WHEREAS, the subject appeal comes Board in response to two Notice of Sign Rejection letters from the Borough Commissioner Department of Buildings (“DOB”), dated 2012, denying registration for two signs at site (the “Final Determinations”), which read, part: The Department of Buildings is in receipt additional documentation submitted response to the Deficiency Letter from Signs Enforcement Unit and in connection with the application for registration above-referenced sign. Unfortunately, intent of viewing is not relevant assessment and as such, the sign is rejected from registration. While we recognize assertion that the sign was not intended visible from arterial, we affirm our rejection. This sign will be subject to enforcement 30 days from the issuance of this letter; WHEREAS a public hearing was held application on October 30, 2012, after due publication in The City Record, with a continued on November 15, 2012, and then to decision December 11, 2012; and WHEREAS, the premises and surrounding site and neighborhood examinations by Chair and Commissioner Hinkson; and WHEREAS, the subject site is located southeast corner of Eleventh Avenue and Street, in a C6-4 zoning district; and WHEREAS, the site is a vacant occupied by a sign structure with a height that contains two north-facing signs (the “Signs”); lot is also occupied by two south-facing signs, DOB has not objected to and are not discussed appeal; and WHEREAS, the Appellant states that 88-12-A & 89-12-A Commissioner of DOB to promulgate rules permitting requirements for certain signs; rules, enacted under Rule 49, provide procedures for registration of advertising 49-15(5) reads in pertinent part: Each sign shall be identified as “advertising” or “non-advertising.” extent a sign is a non-conforming must further be identified as conforming advertising” or “non-conforming non-advertising.” A sign identified as conforming advertising” or “non-conforming non-advertising” shall be submitted Department for confirmation of its conforming status, pursuant to section of this chapter; and WHEREAS, subchapter B of (Registration of Outdoor Advertising Companies), (specifically, Rule 49-15(d)(15)(b)), sets acceptable forms of evidence to establish the existence of a non-conforming sign on date set forth in the Zoning Resolution; and WHEREAS, the Appellant asserts acceptable forms of evidence set forth at Rule pertinent part as follows: Acceptable evidence may include permits, sign-offs of applications after completion, photographs and leases demonstrating the non-conforming use existed prior relevant date; and WHEREAS, the Appellant notes that are also listed as an acceptable form of evidence; WHEREAS, the Appellant cites to document provided by DOB, which sets instructions for filing under Rule 49 and asserts one of the following documents would be evidence for sign registration pursuant to Rule DOB –issued permit for sign erection; approved application for sign erection; dockets/permit book indicating sign permit and (4) publicly catalogued photograph from such as NYC Department of Finance, New Library, Office of Metropolitan History, or State Archives; and REGISTRATION PROCESS WHEREAS, the Appellant states September 1, 2009, pursuant to the requirements Article 502 and Rule 49, it submitted an inventory

… (truncated, full text in PDF)