Laserfiche WebLink
Town of Reading <br />16 Lowell Street <br />Reading, MA 01867 -2683 r <br />UK <br />CE ry ED <br />Phone: 781 - 942 -6612 r C <br />Fax: 781 - 942 -9071 <br />Email: jdelios @ci.reading.ma.us <br />Community Planning and Development op�WgiQ 12, 31 <br />CPDC MINUTES <br />Meeting Dated: October 17, 2011 <br />Location: Selectmen's Meeting Room <br />Time: 7:30 PM <br />Members Present: John Weston, Chair; Charles Adams, and David Tuttle. <br />Members Absent: Nick Safina, Secretary <br />Also Present: Jean Delios, Town Planner; and Kim Saunders, Recording Secretary <br />Mark Mastroianni, Pulte Homes <br />Reed Blute, Pulte Homes <br />Mike Rosati, Engineer for Pulte Homes <br />Fred Van Magness, 243 Franklin Street <br />Christine Brungardt, 324 South Street <br />There being a quorum the Chair called the meeting to order at 7:40 PM. <br />Public Hearing - Proposed Zoning Amendment <br />Section 6.2 "Signs" <br />The Chair opened the public hearing for a proposed zoning amendment to section 6.2 "Signs" of the <br />Zoning By -Laws. Mr. Adams read the legal notice. <br />Ms. Delios gave a brief description why the amendment was needed. She stated EDC discussed <br />concerns for the current exempt signs. The current by -law limits the sign to 16 square feet. She feels <br />the modified by -law is business friendly. It would allow signs not exceeding 32 square feet. <br />Redevelopment would be included in the construction sign definition. The exemption would be for one <br />year; or the applicant would have to come back if the sign is still needed. The maximum allowed sign is <br />one. <br />The Board discussed why there are no restrictions on the sign height on the amended by -law. It was <br />noted that the temporary sign has to be below roof and has to be structural sound. <br />On a motion by Mr. Tuttle, seconded by Mr. Adams, the CPDC voted to close the public hearing <br />by a vote of 3 -0 -0 <br />On a motion by Mr. Tuttle, seconded by Mr. Adams, the CPDC voted to recommend adoption of <br />the proposed zoning amendment, by a vote of 3 -0 -0. <br />Page 1 of 4 <br />