9/5/2018 PLANNING BOARD Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

sometimes the Sign Bylaw was enforced and other times it was not. Additionally, there were conflicts between the Bylaws, which should be reviewed more closely before adding a new Bylaw. Mr. Anderson also asked about the definition for illumination, but Mr. Lehrer noted that there were some unclear definitions in the Sign Bylaw. Mr. Mendoza stated that the intent was that seasonal signs would not be illuminated. Mr. Mendoza inquired why the Sign Bylaw could not be consistently enforced throughout the Town and Mr. Lehrer emphasized that there would be a Public Hearing on the matter and that tonight's meeting was intended to provide comment to the Board of Selectmen. The Chair indicated that she would be sharing Mr. Anderson's comments with the Board. Warrant Article 13: Mixed-Use Planned Development—There was no comment Warrant Article 15: Light Industrial Overlay District-Copies were made of Mr. Fudala's comments regarding Article 15, The Chair inquired about minutes from ERIC and Mr. Lehrer responded that the last approved set of minutes included only discussion. Mr. Lehrer referenced two of Mr. Fudala's comments, stating that the comments regarding the facade had been addressed and that he used the tools that were available to him, so that if maps and lots needed correction, he would do so. There was discussion about using the Assessor's online map. Regarding 40A, Architectural Guidelines (H), Mr. Lehrer suggested use of"Cape Cod vernacular" to address Mr. Fudala's comments, further suggesting consulting with an architect since the Chair did not feel that vernacular was defined. Mr. Lehrer stated that he used the guidelines to draft the Article. Board members did not have additional comments. The Chair expressed concern about some of the lots that may be abutting residential property and the conflict of noxious substances, which could occur with some of the proposed uses, suggesting her preference to strike science and technology uses. Mr. Lehrer responded that the focus was intended to be light industrial uses and that he was unable to remove those uses. Members of the public were invited to address the Board. Mr. Fudala was recognized and noted that all of the uses were already permitted in I-1. It was Mr. Fudala's opinion that the uses should be added to the table of uses. Mr. Fudala stated that much of the proposed uses were handcrafts, but fell under manufacturing and suggested an accompanying scale requirement. Due to conflicting information, it was Mr. Fudala's opinion that the Article could be re- worked to fit into the rest of the Zoning Bylaw and offered his assistance to assist Mr. Lehrer. Mr. Lehrer responded that he would be happy to collaborate if possible, wishing to address the issue sooner rather than in public session. The Chair noted that she did not receive the Article until August 29. Mr. Fudala also noted that the Planning Board was the only granting power in the C-3 Zone, not the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr. Lehrer stated that C-3 featured a 300 foot buffer from the street, which he felt was a problem to be fixed by improving the architecture and integrity. Chairman Waygan suggested that the Board of Selectmen be advised to hold on this Article so that it could be further worked on. There was consensus from Board members. Warrant Article 16: Raze and Replace-Mr, Mendoza explained that Article 16 was a collaboration between him and the Zoning Board of Appeals, to address the issue of homeowners wishing to re-build homes on an undersized lot. Several meetings had occurred with Town Counsel and the Town Manager's office to identify a solution. The Chair reported that Tow Counsel had requested that the ZBA tighten up their regulations because some decisions could have resulted in liability. Mr. Mendoza stated that the ultimate decision was to keep the Article as is, with the addition of"or reconstruct," keeping it cleaner while also addressing the issue. There was discussion noting that Article 16 appearing in the Warrant Packet was not the same Article voted on by the ZBA. There was consensus from members of the ZBA that the Article was not correct. Ron Bonvie stated that the 7