9/5/2018 PLANNING BOARD Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

stated that she would be requesting June-October and Ms. Palumbo asked that the Chair reconsider. Mr. Lehrer asked to make a comment but he was not recognized, though the Chair acknowledged he would be recognized after taking comments first from Board members. The Chair pointed out that the Article defined dimensions as four, eight square foot signs for a particular site and sandwich signs measuring 24 inches by 36 inches. Mr. Balzarini again expressed that he had no issue with the signage. It was noted that the seasonal signs would be reviewed by Design Review and Mr. Cummings agreed that there should be a time limit on the signs, as there would already be a business sign in place. Ms. Palumbo pointed out that seasonal signs were useful when there was an increase in shoppers, because many businesses were tucked in out of the way locations and it was a request based on feedback from businesses and meetings with the Town. Mr. Weeden and Mr. Hansen asked for clarification regarding signage as one per business or not more than four per site. Mr. Mendoza responded that their intent was to limit a front yard with too many signs. Mr. Mendoza confirmed that there was a meeting between businesses and Town officials and confirmed that there were a number of business off the main way and the Article was intended to assist business owners during the busy summer season. In reference to the question, Mr. Mendoza cited an example of Dino's where only four signs would be allowed at the site, as defined by the Zoning Bylaw, Mr. Anderson pointed out that the existing Bylaw created conflicting situations, and the new amendments would add more confusion. Mr. Lehrer stated that site was defined as the entire tract where proposed use or development was located. Mr. Kooharian suggested that seasonal signs should be allowed as needed, with some definition as to the size, and Mr. Balzarini agreed. Mr. Hansen inquired about the 14 foot setback, noting that it would hamper the business in its ability to use sandwich board signage as a means to attract customers. Mr. Lehrer agreed that something needed to be done about the existing Sign Bylaw, requiring additional work. Mr. Lehrer discussed his experience working with Signage Bylaw in Brookline, noting that typically there was a maximum square footage allowed. A sandwich board in Brookline was dealt with separately and it was Mr. Lehrer's opinion that a sandwich board should be an allowable use that could be approved administratively rather than through Design Review. Mr. Lehrer added that a free standing sign was a different situation, with a different role, with a maximum square footage allowed, which could better meet the needs of local business owners. Mr. Rowley recommended the easiest means to assist the business owner without creating issues for the neighborhood. Mr. Fudala was recognized and stated that the Article was submitted by the Board of Selectmen and noted that there was inconsistency regarding the fine and suggested that it be removed. Mr. Fudala pointed out that the last sentence of the fourth paragraph was missing an action verb. Mr. Fudala noted that a Bylaw had been developed previously to better clarify signage, adding that signs should be a General Bylaw rather than a Zoning Bylaw, to eliminate grandfathering, but the proposed Bylaw was not accepted. Ms. Palumbo read for the record an email received from Polar Cave business owner, Mark Lawrence, seeking clarification regarding the definition for"site" and expressing his concern about the disadvantage of merchants at a group location and the constraints of a 10 foot requirement of the sign. Mr. Mendoza explained that 10 feet was determined to ensure the sight line. Mr. Fudala suggested that the proposed Article would not address business owners seeking signage to direct customers to their site, since the Article required the signage to be located on site. W. Anderson pointed out that Design Review served as an advisory Board in the Zoning Bylaw, but the Building Commissioner had established standards and issued the permit and expressed concern that 6