HomeMy Public PortalAboutPlanning Board -- 2013-02-06 Minutes n Brewster Planning Board
p olVey 2198 Main Street
o o '� �9 Brewster,Massachusetts 02631-1898
s ';_ .c; (508)896-3701 ext.1233
r FAX(508)896-8089
,4P'."
nnnnnao
Approved:3-27-13
Vote:6-0-11McMullen abstains
TOWN OF BREWSTER PLANNING BOARD
WORK SESSION-MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday February 6, 2013 at 6:30 pm
Brewster Town Office Building
Chairman Scott Collum convened the Planning Board meeting at 6:33 pm in the Brewster Town Office Building with
members: Rick Judd,William Hoag,Jason Klump,John Leaning,and Elizabeth Taylor present.
Absent:Jdhn McMullen
Other Attendees:Town Planner,Sue Leven
Documents:020613_A Article VI,Signs Draft for Discussion from Leven.
020613_B',Special Event Venue Policy Draft(Use Table, Definitions)from Leven.
020613_C',Email from Golf Commission regarding signs
Collum read the Recording or Taping Notification:
"As required by the Open Meeting Law we are informing you that the Town will be audio taping this public meeting. In addition,if
anyone el$e intends to audio tape this meeting they are required to inform the chair."
6:30 pm lanning Discussion
1. Release of the bond for the Pond Oaks Subdivision
Leven summarized the request for the Board.This is the Winstead Road development.The ownership has changed and
the bond!account manager has requested release of the bond.
Taylor made a Motion to release the Unique Properties' bond for the Pond Oaks Subdivision,Judd Second,All Aye,
L/QIg 6-0
2. Discuss by-law amendments for the following:
• Sign by-law(Article VI)
Stu and Charlotte Fyfe, of the Candleberry Inn on Main Street, were present. Fyfe, C expressed interest in the
by-law amendment process.She stated there are many inconsistencies with signs and the different zoning
districts.She was interested in the sunset clause for pre-existing signs. Fyfe, C asked about the purpose for
regulating signs and aesthetics.She explained that the Town and the State have big signs. How can this be fair
and equitable?She expressed concern for grandfathering. She asked them to clarify issues.
Taylor and Leven discussed Historic District Committee (HDC) sign regulations and legal issues.
Bud Noyes of JT's Seafood on Main Street was present and interested in signs. He stated signs are selectively
enforced, He noted some signs are larger than others are. He added non-profit organizations have no sign
regulations and the current sign by-law is long and restrictive.
Collum told the audience the Board is looking at non-profit organizations and "A"frame signs.
Page 1 of 5
PB Minutes 2-6-13.docx
Leven reminded the businesses that approval of signs by the Historic District Committee (HDC) is another
hurdle to address.
Fyfe, C stated she does not like the large banners displayed on Main Street by the Brewster Baptist Church.
Collum explained that Victor Staley is the enforcement officer.
Noyes asked why Library,Town Hall,Whitecaps signs are permitted to have A frames sings.
Hoag explained the Board is working on a draft of by-law amendments for May Town Meeting.
Leaning explained that the Planning Board is not an enforcement Board.
The Board picked up their discussion at`off premise signs."
§179-20. off-premises signs
Page 7 of 10(from the draft)
1.) Property owner(or leasee) -Collum
3.) Right',of way off Route 6A, permission from the State?—Judd
A. Hoag and Judd discussed Whitecaps signs.
B.Taylor wants it to stay.Taylor and Hoag questioned local requirements and size.
6.)Graduation Signs
A. Klump thinks two months is too long. (1 Week before, 1 week after graduation)
B.Judd, similar to political signs, celebrating events- People should have the right,difficult to enforce.
d. Leaning agreed with Judd.
p. Hoag suggested removing the dates.
E. Leven stated it is ridiculous.
F. It is illegal if not on private property.
G.Collum suggested removing#6.
H.Taylor suggested placing it under exemptions. (Allowed if on private property).
I Leven clarified, if not in by-law, prohibited.
covered under E. 179-20.5—Remove from the previous section.
The Board decided to call it Celebratory Banners/Signs. Remove August 1. (60 days timeframe).
7.) Leven',read from the Finance Committee comments.They suggested ladder signs: Delete rest of sentence
since locations are listed.
A. Hoag, list is too restrictive. Give the Chamber of Commerce (COC) guidance as to where ladder signs
should go. Hoag, 6A and Millstone?Very restrictive list
Leven reminded the Board that the list has been in existence for a long time and the COC did not comment.
B.Judd,Sunflower plaza, (Lemon Tree Village), could be a good area.
The Board discussed locations.
C. Leaning wants to keep it the way is.
Q. Klump asked Hoag about his concern. Future business development/needs?
Leven clarified ladder signs.These signs are not all publically owned.
E. Hoag was in favor of the Chamber being involved with ladder signs.
Noyes explained that the COC was approached by the owner of the ladder signs.The owner wants to sell them
to the COC. Noyes will follow up with Kyle Hinckle.
Page 2 of 5
PB Minutes 2-6-13.docx
There might be an issue with non-members wanting to be included in the ladder signs.
F Taylor suggested having the Town taking them over.
8.)The Board discussed if the Town could take over the ladder signs. The Board is in favor of the ladder signs.
The Board discussed ownership, pricing, and locations. Rte 6A and Route 137?
Leven was in favor of removing ladder signs from the by-law if governed by BOS and a private contractor.
Do existing ladder signs fall under pre-existing non-conforming? Leven will follow up with Town Counsel
A. Leaning asked about options for ownership and management.
The Board decided to hold off further discussion.
B. Hoag,2.) Ladder Sign Regulations, d)addressed generic naming. Favored specific business names
over generic.
C. Collum agreed.
The Board discussed generic signs vs.actual business names.
Fyfe,S e*plained that ladder signs in Dennis are done tastefully. He suggested asking the Town of Dennis how
they handle ladder signs. Noyes agreed they use nice colors.
D.Judd suggested that before the Board gets into the details,they should look at the bigger picture.
(Intent,continuity, feedback)
E. Leaning suggested tabling this subject.
Leven will look into what the other Towns do. Dennis,Chatham, etc.
F.Collum asked about a Smartphone App. Fyfe, C said the Chamber is working on an App.
9.)§179-21 Enforcement;abandoned signs;appeals
A.Judd asked if fees are based on size. Leven, no
a.-c. remove
B. It was suggested that there should be an online catalog of all permitted signs.
.Judd asked about quantifying the citations. Leven referenced MA law.The Police Chief said not to post fines.
they are impossible to enforce.They questioned escalating vs. set fines.
What about removal of the sign?
The Board discussed options and the process of notification of an illegal sign. They also discussed how does
grandfathering affects illegal signs and how do they determine who has permits. Byron Cain, Innkeeper,
Brewster by the Sea,changed their business name so they had to go to a smaller sign. The Board discussed
grandfathering and registering sign permits with photos.
Leven noted that some signs pre-existed the original sign by-law.
Fyfe, C suggested the Board does not grandfather signs forever. Perhaps when a business is sold, it should be
brought Op to date.
Judd added they are looking for a by-law that is readable,going forward.
Fyfe,C asked if the purpose of the sign code is to provide a certain look. Leven explained that HDC is
responsible for how a sign looks, but that Zoning does not get involved. Each business should have same
Page 3 of 5
PB Minutes 2-6-13.docx
square fodtage to work with instead of sign restrictions by zoning districts.This by-law cannot say anything
about materials or style.
Fyfe,C expressed concern about the grandfathering rule. Leven stated they could not eliminate it because it is
zoning and MA general law.She added many towns have it in Town code, not zoning.
Byron Cain, Innkeeper of Brewster by the Sea stated he supports grandfathering.
Collum stated he is in favor of 120 days vs. 60 days.
The Board discussed abandoned signs.
Leven explained the Finance Committee comments are mostly grammatical issues. She will share them at the
end of the meeting.
Review of draft sent by Leven—Article VI,Signs
The Board decided to review the Sign draft that was emailed by Leven for review.This document is the revised
draft that included their comments from the last meeting.
1.)Taylor was concerned about interior signs within a property(i.e.Ocean Edge Resort)
She commented on trail markers. Should they be included?She asked about West Gate signs.
The Brewster Conservation Trust(BCT) is covered under G, page 6.
She also asked about roof signs(projecting signs).
The Board had a lengthy overview discussion regarding definitions.
The Board discussed sign area measurement. Leven noted it is the biggest difference between the current by-
law and the revised draft by-law.
Leven read from current the current by-law.CH zone.Current,total 14 square feet. New draft 30 sq.feet.
Bud Noyes thought that sounded fair.
The Board continued a discussion regarding sign size.
30 square feet is based on a comparison with other towns. Harwich is 48 square feet total.
§179-20.].Sign area measurement and regulations
§ 179-20F2 Construction and maintenance
A. Leaning suggested add safe and secure,good state of repair,to B, sign and structure.
EI.Taylor asked about house numbers, poor condition
§179-20. Exemptions from permit requirements
A.Taylor asked about home occupation and quarter boards. HO,4 sq.feet. 1 per dwelling.
Intersection island signs were discussed.They questioned whether they should be regulated or not.
Cain from By the Sea inn suggested not having business signs in the islands.
Leven read from the current by-law.
Judd stated if it comes out from exemptions then it would not be regulated. If it stays under exemption and
definitions then regulated.
Hoag suggested keeping"as is" in the draft, including the exemption. Klump Second.
Page 4 of 5
PB Minutes 2-6-13.docx
There was a very long discussion about this exemption.
Judd,Yes
Hoag,Yes,
Collum, No not exempt from a permit
Leaning, Yes
Taylor,
Hoag withdrew the motion,Judd Second,All Aye,Vote 6-0.
The Board decided to table this discussion.
§179-20.5 Regulations for specific types of signs
E.Graduation(celebratory)banners should be exempt.
G. lnterpetive displays and kiosks.
Taylor gLestioned maximum of 4 signs shall be permitted by site.She asked what if you have 1800 acres.
emove 4 signs.
L. 1, Real;Estate Signs.Judd asked about signs on the waterside of a property.They discussed location.
Leven will ask Staley if there have been any complaints for waterside signs.
Leaning suggested something that allows for waterside signage.
He would like to see it added. Street frontage and waterfront side.
Collum stated Town and community event signs conflicts with municipal signs, (60 sq. ft)
They discussed further.
Taylor was concerned that the special event signs had been removed.
It had been combined with town and community event signs.
Taylor asked for a definition of town and community events.
Visitor InIformation Signs—They made it plural.
• Off street Parking and Loading by-law(Article VII)—This was not discussed.
• Special Event Venue(Use Table and Definitions)
Leven sulmmarized the process and purpose.They are trying to update zoning per Staley's request.This would
include an Update to the Use Table and Definitions.She added it puts a placeholder for the use in the by-law.
Leven will be checking on the dates for referral of the by-laws to the BOS and then to public hearing.
Topics the Chair did not reasonably anticipate—None.
Leaning Made a Motion to adjourn, Klump Second,All Aye,Vote 6-0.
The meeting ended at 9:50 pm. BREWSTE TOWN CLERK
The next,regular meeting is 2-13-13 @ 6:30 pm.
The next work session meeting is scheduled for 2-20-13. '13 APR :35PM
Respec Ily sub ted
\'1K William Hoag, Planning Board Cl- k Kelly Moore, Se for Dept.Assistant- Planning
Page 5 of 5
PB Minutes 2-6-13.docx