Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-05-15 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes1 yorq� e Town of Reading )m Cleo, ov Meeting Minutes RECEIVED µ, TOWN CLERK " ^^ E'DING, MASS. Board - Committee - Commission - Council: Zoning Board of Appeals 2014 JUL I5 Pit �3 Date: 2014 -05 -15 Time: 7:00 PM Building: Reading Town Hall Location: Selectmen Meeting Room Address: 16 Lowell Street Purpose: General Business Attendees: Members - Present: Damase Caouette, Chair; Robert Redfern, John Jarema, John Miles, Erik Hagstrom Members - Not Present: Kathleen Hackett, David Traniello, Glen Redmond Others Present: Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Maureen Knight on behalf of Damase Caouette Topics of Discussion: Case # 14 -08 A Public Hearing on the petition of Mutual Oil Company who seeks a Variance under Section(s) 6.2 of the zoning bylaws in order to install multiple signs and LED lighting as per plans on the property located at 83 Main Street in Reading, Massachusetts. Attorney Brad Latham presented the history of the property. The property has been a gas station for many years and it is a small family oil company based out of Brockton. He reviewed the bylaws currently in place regarding signage. He said the massive canopy is there to protect the customers from the elements. The gas station is right off the highway and it is identified due to the signage. Attorney Latham explained what the other gas stations in town have for identifiable signage that is well known to their brand. He said the Applicants need identifiable signage so they can be found. The representative from Mutual Oil represents the third generation in his family who own Mutual Oil. He presented their need for recognition via signage so their site offers credibility. He listed the individual signs they want to install and why they need them. Blue, red, and orange are their trademark colors. He detailed what signage would be on the canopy and how they will be sensitive to the neighborhood. They plan on using digital price signs. Mr. Miles requested the station hours and was told their winter hours are from 7:00 AM — 9:00 PM and summer hours are from 7:00 AM —11:00 PM. The Chairman read the memo sent to the board by the Building Inspector stating his denial of a permit and why. Page 1 1 Mr. Jarema asked what relief they are requesting and Attorney Latham listed their requests. He listed what signage is presently on other gas stations in town. He said some of the requests seem consistent with what other gas stations have in town. Mr. Redfern said there are buildings in town that have similar signs as what is being requested by the Applicant and others have very limited signage. He also thought each gas station should be allowed comparable signage. He also said he did not think canopy signs should be lit signs. Mr. Hagstrom was concerned with the halo signs and did not think it was justified as this was something that has not been used in town. The Mutual Oil representative said it is just another illuminated sign that has a halo glow. Lisa Manson of Sign Design explained in more detail the signage plan. Mr. Miles thought something needed to be done to this station and that it was hard to know what the hours were. He did not have a lot of issues with the requested signage. Mr. Caouette wanted to know if this signage was at any other of their gas stations and the Mutual Oil representative said this was their design at other of their stations. Mr. Caouette said he did not think it would make sense to review other stations and see if they did have permits for all their signage as it would not affect the case at hand. Mr. Jarema said there were parts of the request that could be granted this evening but other parts of the request were not as necessary. He said he had no problem at all with the painted canopy. Two small signs without lighting on the canopy would be acceptable to him. He also would allow the digital price signage as there are others in town. Mr. Jarema said a Variance would go with the property The Mutual Oil representative said they tried to not be excessive and they thought what they requested is what is expected to be in Reading. He asked the Board to consider that: During the day it is obvious this a gas station but in the dark not so much and therefore the lighting is really needed. Mr. Redfern said he would be opposed to any lit signs on the canopy. The unlit Mutual sign in two places on the canopy would be okay and the market sign would be allowed. Nick Safina from the CPDC said this is the gateway to Reading and he is not sure that beautifying a site by over - lighting is not necessary. He said they are really asking for four signs. Mr. Safma said the Planning Board actually likes halo lighting but they do not think lighting is required on the canopy. Painting the canopy would be fine but signage on it is not required. He also though lighting on the pumps was allowed. He did not think Reading needed to accept lighting plans just because it was the plan used in other neighboring towns. Mr. Jarema thinks the plan submitted should be modified and they can come back later for modifications after the new signage bylaws are in place. Mr. Satin said to allow the colors and they can come back for the channel letters if it is allowed in the new sign bylaws. Mr. Caouette said this is the first property you see as you enter the gateway to Reading. Attorney Latham said nothing should be predicated on what may show up in the future in the new signage bylaws. Pat Harrison said she is glad they me not allowing a lighted canopy as she is an abutter and it would be a hardship. Page 1 2 Attorney Latham explained the uniqueness of this property and why it is so different from other gas stations and other properties in the immediate area. On a motion by Robert Redfern, seconded by John Jarema, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to grant the Applicant's request for a Variance from Section 6.2 of the zoning bylaws for pump signage, a single wall sign on the existing building, for LED or electronic for gasoline pricing on the free - standing sign and at the gas pumps and to have a bi- colored canopy but with no signage on the canopy or illumination of the canopy. The proposed wall sign reading "mutual M mart' shall not exceed 19 inches by 101 inches. The vote was 4 -1 -0 (Caouette, Miles, Redfern, and Jarema in favor, Hagstrom opposed). 75 Pearl Street Major/Minor Modification 75 Pearl Street Request for a Major/Minor Modification for ZBA Cases # 95 -01 and 95 -02. Attorney Brad Latham represented the Applicants LCB Senior Living, LLC. The CPDC will have involvement in this project as well as the ZBA. Italo Visco presented the history of the property and the design that was approved in the past. The current property does have a ramp but it is difficult to use and they propose to install a handicapped assessable drop -off with a portico over and use the back entrance as a service entrance. Some interior walls will be removed and changed to make more efficient use of the space. They are staying within the existing footprint and are upgrading with cosmetic changes and slight interior changes. Mr. Redfern said they are coming before the ZBA to have their proposed plan determined to be either major or minor modification. He said he would not consider it to be a major modification and the new entrance will be much clearer to visitors not familiar with the building. Mr. Caouette read the Building Inspector's memo to the Board. Attorney Latham said the finding that was made to the original decision was that changing from the front to the back was a minor modification. Mr. Jarema said the past decision said 30% of the site was to be green and is there documentation that 30% of the property has been determined to be green. He also wanted to know how many units would be retained as affordable units and is there now three levels of licensure. Mr. Visco said there is over 30% green space. There are 18 units set aside as affordable. The certification process involves a third party who does inspections. Nothing changes in their obligation to Reading. There is really only one licensure and it has been transferred already on the day the papers were passed. Ms. Taylor of 76 Pearl Street abutter had concerns about the soccer field, open space, possible additions, delivery trucks, and the driveway. Page 1 3 Mark Rowe is an abutter across the street and he said it was terrible living there now and he is worried about additional fire engines and ambulances, brighter lighting, and the property management. Roberta Sullivan of the Historical Commission is concerned about a major grade change in the front of the building and the canopy that will cover up the architectural features. Mr. Jarema wanted to know what uses would be for the front and rear door. Mr. Visco said the front would be for residents and guests and the rear door would be for deliveries, staff, and medical vehicles. On a motion by Erik Hagstrom, seconded by John Miles, the ZBA moved that the Board find the proposed changes made to the property required a Minor Modification to the existing Special Permit. The finding was conditioned upon: LCB submitting to the ZBA the CPDC approval of the proposed plans indicating that LBC continues to meet the thirty (30) percent open area requirement. The vote was 5 -0 -0 (Caouette, Miles, Redfem, Jarema, Hagstrom). Report on the ZAC David Traniello was not present to give a report. Adjournment On a motion by Damase Caouette, seconded by Erik Hagstrom, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to adjourn. The vote was 5 -0 -0 (Caouette, Miles, Redfern, Jarema, Hagstrom). Page 1 4