HomeMy Public PortalAboutPlanning Board -- 2013-10-16 Minutes Brewster Planning Board
\�\u�0��%l1°n°nlu///0/„ 2198 Main Street
o*".40'"' 't Brewster,Massachusetts 02631-1898
(508)896-3701 ext.1233
y FAX(5 ) 9
s y� 8
o :.a5�€ 08 896-8089
r F y
Approved:12-11-13
Vote:5-0-1,McMullen abstains
TOWN OF BREWSTER PLANNING BOARD ERE _TER T LERK
Regular MEETING MINUTES (extra meeting)
Wednesday October 16, 2013 at 6:3o pm '14 Plhj.!R 2;
Brewster Town Office Building
Chairman William Hoag convened the Planning Board meeting at 7:06 pm in the Brewster Town Office Building with
members: Rick Judd,Jason Klump,John Leaning, Scott Collum, and Elizabeth Taylor present.
Absent:John McMullen
Other attendees:Sue Leven, Brian Warburton and Jim Trabulsie of the Historic District Committee.
Documents: 101613_A
The Chair read the Recording or Taping Notification:
"As required by the Open Meeting Law we are informing you that the Town will be audio and video taping this public meeting. In
addition,if anyone else intends to audio or video tape this meeting he or she is required to inform the chair."
7:00 pm Public Hearing
The Chair read the legal advertisement.
The Planning Board is seeking comment on Sign Regulations in Brewster and proposed changes to be brought
to Town Meeting in May of 2014. Specific topics on which the Board is seeking comment at this meeting
include:
*The green and white ladder signs at various intersections in Brewster
*The appropriate maximum square footage for signs in Brewster
* A sunset clause
The Board has invited members from the Historic District Committee to join in the discussion.
Hoag stated they have had numerous discussions over the last few months.The big issue is sign size. He asked the HDC
to comment.
Historic District(HDC) Comments
Member Comments
Warburton Ladder Signs--in favor of the green and white ladder signs
as long as they are "Brewster Green"
Size—In HDC it should be 12 square feet, Limiting in the (I)
Zone to 12 square feet is absurd.
Sunset Clause—Break it down. Not in favor of everyone
conforming to the 12 square feet.
Trabulsie Sunset Clause—Signs have value to the business. If use
does not change they should keep the sign. HDC guidelines
are defined by the State. Brewster is unique because it has
retained its rural character. (Old Cape Cod Charm)
Size—In favor of 12 square feet but it is not realistic
Zones—RM in HDC, 6A—businesses--
Page 1 of 4
PB Minutes 10-16-13.docx
Fisag asked about locations on Route 6A that are in residential zones yet commercial in nature.
The Board has discussed less than 12 square feet in a residential area. He discussed 6A with Jim.
Warburton acknowledged mixed use in residential zones. Warburton and Hoag discussed different zones and uses in
these zones. He questioned consistency and the lack of enforcement.
Warburton explained they refer to the Building Commissioner regarding sizes over 12 square feet.
Board Comments:
Judd asked Leven if she could share an update regarding the ladder signs.
Leven shared the information from her discussion with Town Counsel.They are all on public property.The
Board of Selectmen (BOS) has the authority to remove or to ask them to be registered.The BOS can arrange
to have them maintained through a third party if they choose to do so.
Public Comments:
Elbert Ulshoeffer from Stony Brook Road addressed the Board. He stated the Board is not proposing anything now.
Hoag stated they are going to decide on sign size.
Ulshoeffer stated the aesthetics of this community should be your driving force. *He believes that size and quantity of
are part of aesthetics.
Leven explained the Board does not have anything to do with aesthetics. (Only size, location and quantity)
Ulshoeffer does not think that the lack of signs have affected the business community. (16 square feet seems
reasonable.)
The Board continued to discuss Historic District Committee (HDC) guidelines (12 sq.ft.), 16 square feet,the prior 30
square feet proposed with Ulshoeffer, Warburton and Trabulsie.
Ulshoeffer asked them to consider the community character. (Not including A frame signs) Consider sign exemptions. i.e.
A-frame as a temporary sign.
Ulshoeffer is hoping they are not going over 20 square feet except for in the (I) Industrial Zone.
• Re: ladder boards signs; he believes the town will vote for it.They can be maintained.
• Sunset Clause is a mistake.Add a sign is an accessory use to a principal use in the definitions. If a principal use
goes away then the accessory use goes away.
Hoag was in favor of a Sunset Clause at change of use.
Warburton suggested changing the wording. He was not in favor of sandwich board signs.
Leven read from the minutes from the last meeting.
• 4 members in favor of 16 square feet.VB or CH zones
• Residential signs should not exceed 8 sq. ft.
• Additional 2 signs no larger than 6 sq. ft (CH)
• Sandwich signs usually 6 sq. ft.
Public Comment.cont.
Terry Halvorson addressed the Board. She owns a business on Underpass Road. She provided a summary of how the
ladder signs were initiated.She does not mind if the Town wants to take them back. She requested that Rose Forge have
the top spot in perpetuity on the ladder sign Underpass/Route 6A.The town needs to address since there are more
businesses on Underpass Road now. She has four signs total. She paid for permits every year. Several years ago,the
building department refused the permit money.
Leven clarified that Staley could not find any regulation that discussed collecting a fee.There was never a fee
set.A previous building commissioner allowed for the sign fee.
Klump noted this was a fair deal, Collum agreed.
Halvorson asked about what the Board of Selectmen (BOS) prefer. Hoag noted they have not brought it to the BOS.
Leven had requested an opinion from Town Counsel.
Hoae noted that the ladder sign definition should be addressed.
Halvorson stated that the "line of sight" was addressed with the ladder signs. Hoag added they would discuss further.
Page 2 of 4
PB Minutes 10-16-13.docx
Public Comment.cont.
Sign Size
Marcia Gallazzi, owner of The Family School, Salt Box School, and Brewster Day Camp on Route 6A addressed the Board.
She thanked the board for their discussion. She stated safety should be a major consideration in determining sign size.
She explained to the Board that they have two driveways and they exist in a passing zone on Route 6A. She explained
the challenges and the record of accidents. Once they changed their sign, the accidents decreased.
She noted that with good signage people move in a safe way. She asked about an appeal process. Leven noted this exists
within the Zoning Board of Appeals. Gallazzi was in favor of sign size by location, not zone.
Leven pointed out that schools are exempt from zoning.
Off Premise, Real Estate Open House Signs
Jeff Chambers, real estate agent was present. He works with John Leaning.
He addressed the need for temporary off premise signs (re: open houses).
Hoag explained that it is in the proposed by-law not the current by-law. One of the exemptions is open house and yard
sign. P. 5 of 10. (L)
Leaning suggested the exemption taken from the Town of Harwich. 2 x 3 size, (Not more than 2 days)
Currently there is nothing in the by-law.
Judd added they should discuss"for rent" signs at beachfront properties. How long should they be allowed?
Board Comments:
Taylor asked about decisions.
Le ni was in favor of maximum sign size of 12- 16 square feet.
Hoag requested votes on sign size.
Maximum size of sign-- Informal Poll—Leaning(12),Judd (16), Hoag (16), Klump (16), Collum (16)—(square footage)
Collum made a Motion to accept 16 sauare feet as the maximum sign size of an individual sign,on one property,
Discussion. By location or zone?
Leaning was in favor of by location.Judd chose all zones with the exception of Industrial.
Klumo stated residential is 8. Hoag stated by location not by zone.
Leven explained that if you do it by use then you are doing it by location because you are not going to find
Commercial (CH) uses in a Residential Medium Density(RM) zone that are not already there.You will find
residential uses in the Village Business(VB)Zone that should not have 16 square feet. She suggested they speak
to the use of the property vs. district or location.
Taylor asked for clarification. CH, Residential, Industrial use.
Klump questioned residential use asked for an example.They discussed home occupation. (Accountants, lawyers, use)
Antique stores in a RM zone.There can be mixed use within one property.
Klump explained that then you would have 16 square feet signs in residential zone.
Warburton stated they are looking at it the wrong way. Look at mixed use.
Hoag asked Leven to explain her comments further.
Leven explained that Brewster has arbitrary zoning districts. She provided an example with VB and CH.
There are non-conforming uses in every zoning district. Mixed use is everywhere.
A regulation specific to zoning districts does not make sense since the zoning districts are not"pure."
Warburton was in favor of looking at it by mixed use.
Leven noted home occupation is not considered commercial use.
Klumo thinks it makes sense by use. Collum and Klump discussed further.
The Board discussed the zones.Judd agreed with Leven.
Hoag summarized in any zone but by Use.
Page 3 of 4
PB Minutes 10-16-13.docx
Collum made a Motion to accept 16 square feet maximum size for one sign,commercial use,
Discussion
Taylor questioned the word "commercial"
Leven read from the table of use. Page 125. Commercial (except as provided in 179-36)
Klump was in favor of doing this by zone.
Collum made a second Motion to allow one sign 16 square feet maximum in a commercial facility and CH use,Judd
Second,
Discussion
Taylor was in favor of 12 square feet.She expressed concern that residential could have a smaller sign than the
commercial businesses next door on Route 6A. (Yes.) She disagreed.
Judd addressed Taylor's concern. He shared a mixed-use example.
Leaning thought 16 square feet was too big for home occupation in a residential area.
(The Board explained that home occupation was not under discussion) Leaning noted. Page 125.
Vote
4 Aye (Hoag, Collum, Leaning,Judd), 2 No (Klump,Taylor)—4-2-0
Discussion
Residential Use, 10 square feet.
Leven clarified residential uses. Last meeting the Board discussed zones.
Leven stated there is no reason to have a sign in residential use. Home occupation only. (listed under comm.
Uses) Currently home occupation is 4 square feet.
Vote
Leaning made a Motion for home occupation signs to be a maximum of 4 square feet,Taylor Second,All Aye,Vote 5-1-0.
Klump voted no.
Discussion
How many additional signs should we have with Commercial uses?
Warburton suggested a combined square footage.
Judd referenced reviewing the visual clutter. He provided an example using 20 square feet.
Warbuton explained the visual clutter further. (Multiple signs)
Hoag noted they discussed additional sign and possible sizes.They agreed it was to be no larger than 6 square feet.
Vote
Leaning made a Motion for one additional sign no larger than 6 square feet (commercial use),Taylor Second,
Discussion
Collum asked commercial only, not community facilities. Collum read from the by-law.
Leven explained the businesses that zoning does not regulate, are regulated by State law.
Collum amended the Motion to include commercial facilities.Judd Second, 5 Aye, Klump disagreed with the proposal
being done by Use
Vote 5-0-1. Klump abstains.
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 8:30 pm.
Respectf su•• ed
/.
L-'Jason Klunip,Ong Board Clerk
Kelly Moore,Senior Dept.Assistant-Planning G/v
Page 4 of 4
PB Minutes 10-16-13.docx