My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/02/1996 PLANNING BOARD Minutes
>
10/02/1996 PLANNING BOARD Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/7/2023 2:01:36 PM
Creation date
3/8/2022 1:16:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
PLANNING BOARD
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
10/02/1996
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
the hope was to write a completely new By -Law in order to make <br />some needed corrections. The reality being, after many months <br />and much work, just how very difficult that is to accomplish. <br />The Selectmen are directing the Building Inspector to enforce the <br />Sign Code, if there is not to be a new By -Law, adjustments to the <br />present one are expected in order to make it ready for <br />enforcement. <br />(There was some discussion regarding illumination, <br />internally/externally lit signs, safety factors thereto and <br />corporate standard signs.) <br />(There was also discussion regarding the Grandfathering <br />issue, State Statutes Provisions, Zoning By -Law Provisions and <br />Sign Permits.) <br />For the record, the Chairman wanted to make Mr. Halpern's <br />position clear. One concern is with the way the Article was <br />publicized, submitted by the Sign Code Study Committee. <br />The Chairman has been advised that the Article was actually <br />submitted by the Board of Selectmen, that it was submitted <br />properly and that "Sign Code Study Committee" is an error. <br />Mr. Halpern expressed his feeling that, if adopted, this <br />Article could prove to be a great expense for people. He said <br />he is happy with the neon signs he has and would not want to be <br />reduced to two. <br />The Chairman stated he feels the proposed changes are more <br />liberal than the current By -Law. The intent is not to harm <br />people, but to address blatant violators of major issues. <br />(There was brief discussion regarding the use of the term <br />"structure" in the Zoning By -Law, Selectmen approval of town - <br />owned property.) <br />(John Kuchinsky left the Meeting at 9:40 p.m.) <br />Patrick Coffey agreed the proposed By -Law appears to be more <br />liberal and enforceable than the existing By -Law. Granted the <br />Grandfathering issue is complex. He supports the Selectmen <br />and/or Building Inspector's request for an enforceable Sign By - <br />Law. <br />MOTION: Patrick Coffey made a Motion to recommend approval <br />of this Article, which Motion was duly seconded by Martine <br />Meijering and voted upon at a later point of the Hearing, <br />following Board discussion: <br />Dennis Balzarini agreed this seems to be a good start to the <br />request for a Sign By -Law. He is in agreement with Pat Coffey <br />that revisions could be made at a later date. He recommended <br />-17- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.