DemocratsPittsford.org

As of last Thursday, the Pierson signs at Sutherland and Monroe had come down but the Brizee sign was still up. As per the Village, the responsible employee is on vacation and won’t be back until Monday.

Since the Trustees get notified about a complaint, well the Pierson signs are gone.

My intent was just to mention the Village temporary signs before going on to Town temporary signs but there is more. My photos, the property lines as shown on the County mapping site (http://www.mappingmonroe.org/mmb)/ and the Village Code ( go to the Village website http://www.villageofpittsford.org/; use the link in the first paragraph, enter 168-6 as the section number you want to look at) indicate that as of last Thursday you would be hard pressed to find a legal real estate sign anywhere in the village!

Take the signs on the south side of Monroe east from Main to the bank. these include the for rent sign near the corner as well as several for lease/sale signs further east.

Blue line is emphasizes property line

Click on the image to see it blown up or go to the mapping site and look for yourself.

The property line is flush with the buildings, not out towards the sidewalk.

What is going on with code enforcement in the Village? If you understand, please comment below. I don’t have a clue.

And this is a newly revised ordinance as of 4-28-2009!

That for sale sign on the north side of Monroe further east- within the right of way and with the additional part on top, my estimate is that it is over the four square feet limit. The signs along Jefferson are apparently all in the right of way. Shoen Place – Flour Mill for rent sign is legal since the property goes essentially across the street but with the one on the grain tower, there are two signs on the parcel with only one permitted.

Pittsford Dairy has a temporary sign most days between the sidewalk and the curb, in the right of way.

While the Village Zoning Board of Appeals can allow exceptions, it looks like most temporary signs in the village don’t meet code.

Then there are the contractors signs allowed by 168-6 A(3). My guess is the intent of the new law was that these should be set back 10 feet, too, but the law doesn’t read that way. In any case they should be on the property being worked on, not in the right of way and certainly not in the right of way down at the corner.

The ones I saw last week didn’t seem to comply except for the one at Danielle’s which might and I mean might not be in the right of way. And whose house was being painted a few weeks back by the painter that had a sign at Monroe and Washington?

If these signs are gone or more legally placed by the time you look, great! But don’t let anyone claim they weren’t there – I have the pictures to prove it.

The Village has a reasonable Temporary Sign ordinance but gentle suggestions by me haven’t gotten it enforced recently.

I’ll use a club this time by using maps, pictures of the signs and references to the Village Code. If you know someone at the Village Hall, please suggest to them to look at this page.

If these aren’t illegal under the code, please register and enter a comment explaining why not.

Here is the first map.

Red Dots approximately indicate signs in question

Double click on the thumbnail to see the full image. The image was created with Monroe County mapping tool and the three red dots were added to indicate the locations of the signs in the following image.

The red dot in the upper left corner is the where the Brizee signis  in front of Village Green.

2007 picture of Higgins sign in same place that Brizee sign is now

As you can see from this 2007 pictures of a JJ. Higgins it is well into the right of way let alone 10 feet back from the property line. Today a Brizee real estate sign approximately in the same place. This past winter I counted four different signs at the same time in this location.

Where is the property line? Based on the map image, I think it is a good 10 feet plus off the sidewalk. Given the 10 foot setback requirement, these signs have been 20 feet closer to the sidewalk than required by Village Code.

In the lower right of the map image above are two more red dots on the property on the southwest corner of Monroe and Sutherland. One is on the Sutherland side and the other is on the Monroe side where at the time this picture was taken around 9:50am on 7/25/09 there was another illegal sign.

The Pierson sign is the one of interest

Forget the sign to the right, it was gone on Monday afternoon, 7/27/09. But if were removed by a Village employee why did they ignore the Pierson sign?

It is a three time loser. A close look using the mapping software indicates that the property line is approximately where the tree is. This sign may not even be on the property let alone have a ten foot setback.

Then there is the size. The Village says four square feet maximum. With the sold sign on top and the realtor addition below, this one might make six or seven square feet.

For the third strike, check out the ‘Sold’ sign on the top. I think it was there all last week and was still there on Monday afternoon. That makes it somewhere more than four times the maximum 24 hours allowed by Village code. Look it up – I think is section 168-6.

On the same property is this sign around the corner.

Same three strikes

Yes, it legal to have a sign on each street frontage. But the same three strikes make this one illegal, too.

Isn’t the owner of this real estate firm a newly elected member of the Village Board?

Pierson real estate is an equal transgressor in the Town, too. Another post or two about Village signs first before going back to signs outside the Village.

Am I wrong? Register and Comment.

Am I right? Call the Village Hall and ask why they allow all these illegal signs.

I basically like the temporary sign ordinances in the Village and in the Town.

It is the lack of enforcement that I have a problem with.

The town revised the October 2006 version in March of 2007 after a dispute over essentially the restriction on free speech. Not that I expect the Town to admit it, but there was a behind the scenes discussion with the local chapter of the NYCLU that created a new version that that would avoid a lawsuit.

The town ordinance is section 185-138.1 which can be found online through the town website http://townofpittsford.org through the town code link on the left side. Use the link http://www.ecode360.com/?custId=PI1657 to get to the Town Code directly and enter 185-138.1 in the block on the left.

(more…)