Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-03-07 Community Planning and Development Commission Minutes� OFq Town of Reading Meeting Minutes Board - Committee - Commission - Council: Community Planning and Development Commission 'cf11b 'r,eY l A 8:33 Date: 2016 -03 -07 Time: 7:30 PM Building: Reading Town Hall Location: Selectmen Meeting Room Address: 16 Lowell Street Session: Purpose: General Business Version: Attendees: Members - Present: Chair Jeff Hansen, Dave Tuttle, Nick Safina and Karen Goncalves -Dolan Members - Not Present: John Weston Others Present: Assistant Town Manager lean Delios, Community Development Director Julie Mercier, Al Sylvia, Jeff Kwass, Robert Sigsbury, MaryEllen O'Neill, Timothy O'Neill, Tony D'Arezzo Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Julie Mercier on behalf of the CPDC Topics of Discussion: Chair Jeff Hansen called the meeting to order at 7:35 PM. Sian Permit Application Apoiicant: Supercuts. 44 fake 481 Walkers Brook Drive Jeff Kwass from ViewPoint Sign was present on behalf of the application. There is no Master Signage Plan on file for this site. The Applicant is proposing a 16 square foot, internally - illuminated LED wall sign containing the standard Supercuts logo. The sign will be affixed to the Supercuts portion of the building facade. The sign complies with the Sign Bylaw as well as with The Wilder Company's requirements for the property. Mr. Tuttle moved that the CPDC approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for 44 (aka 48) Walkers Brook Drive. The motion was seconded by Mr. Safina and approved with a 4 -0 -0 vote. Sian Permit Application Applicant: Reading Square Barber Shoo, 11 Pleasant Street Robert Sigsbury of Reading Square Barber Shop was present on behalf of the application. The Applicant is proposing to install a wall sign and a blade sign for the business. The wall sign will be 3.6 square feet and will be located in the indented portion of the facade above the door to the shop. The blade sign will be affixed to an existing bracket attached to the 2nd story of the building fagade; it will project approximately 2.5 feet from the building facade, and will hang approximately 14 feet from the ground. No lighting is proposed. The signs comply with the Sign Bylaw. Mr. Tuttle moved that the CPDC approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for 11 Pleasant Street. The motion was seconded by Mr. Safina and approved with a 4 -0 -0 vote. Page 1 1 Sian Bylaw Discussion Ray Miyares and Blake Mensing of Miyares and Harrington LLP (Town Counsel) were present to discuss signage with the Commission. Mr. Miyares explained to the Commission the details of a recent Supreme Court case from Gilbert, Arizona regarding signage. The sign in question directed people to where Sunday services for a church would be held. Gilbert, AZ ordered the sign to be taken down because It did not comply with their Sign Bylaw. The case went to court. The Supreme Court ruled that municipalities can only regulate signs by function, not by content. Mr. Mlyares stated that this recent Supreme Court decision raises a lot of questions for the Town of Reading's Sign Bylaw, as it has a lot of regulations that relate to content. Mr. Miyares also noted that the majority opinion written by Justice Clarence Thomas does not refer to any of the previous Supreme Court cases relating to signs and thus it is unclear exactly whether the decisions in those cases are still considered good law or not. He suggested that the Commission use the following rule: "if you have to read the sign to characterize it, then you are regulating content." He also pointed to a list generated by Justice Samuel Alito to help clarify the situation. The Commission discussed whether to go through the Town's existing bylaw and try to fix it to comply with Town Counsel's guidance on the Supreme Court's decision, or to use a Model Bylaw provided by Town Counsel and fine tune it to fit Reading. Town Counsel noted that most of his client towns are trying to fix their own bylaws; however, Reading's bylaw is the longest and most complex of all of them. Mr. Safina expressed his concern about starting over and potentially missing something that may be Important. He also noted the need to figure out the Intent of our bylaw, and pointed out that there are regulations for signage in the 40R and PUD sections of the Bylaw as well. Mr. Miyares suggested that all sign regulations be put in one place. He noted that signage can be regulated by zoning district. He explained that all regulations must stand up to strict scrutiny, meaning that they must have important local value and be narrowly constructed. He noted that it Is virtually impossible to pass this test due to the first amendment. The Supreme Court's decision protects first amendment rights. Mr. Miyares recommended using language such as "signs that appear on properties that are for sale" versus "for sale" signs. He suggested using Alto's list as a guide because it incorporates prior rulings and the new ruling. Mr. Tuttle suggested regulating usage of signs (i.e., time, location) versus signs themselves. He asked whether it is possible to define all signs as temporary structures and regulate them as such. Mr. Miyares noted that not all signs are temporary. He suggested regulating the number of signs in residential areas. Mr. Safina suggested looking at the Model Bylaw and Alito's list. Mr. Hansen asked if the ruling is strictly content based. Mr. Miyares said yes Mr. Safina asked about permanent directional signs and Mr. Miyares responded that all signs In the public right -of -way are either exempt or regulated by the Board of Selectmen. Mr. Miyares explained that the Supreme Court is concerned with special treatment based on sign type. Government signs are exempt. Controversies usually only arise when a town tries to enforce a sign regulation. Page 1 2 Mr. Saflna opined that the Town's sign bylaw is reasonable but that it is still hard for the Town to regulate it; many businesses do not follow the rules. He worries that it will spiral_. out of control. Mary Ellen O'Neill, 125 Summer Avenue, asked what the Town will lose in revising the Sign Bylaw. Mr. Miyares opined that the Town should be able to keep 95% of its intent, assuming things can be defined in generic terms. He said that the stakes are high; the Town does not want to lose a battle over first amendment rights. The Commission asked if any of Town Counsel's other towns have had bylaws approved by the Attorney General yet. Mr. Miyares noted that two of their towns - Hopkinton and Stockbridge - have bylaws going before Town Meeting this spring. Ms. Delios suggested adding a paragraph to the beginning of the Sign Bylaw clarifying the process of applying for a sign permit. Mr. Miyares asked if the CPDC wants to continue issuing Certificates of Appropriateness. The Commission generally agreed that they do. Mr. Hansen asked what the current risks with the bylaw are. Mr. Miyares answered that the Town has to be very cautious when enforcing anything under this bylaw. He noted that it would be best to consult him first before trying to enforce anything. Ms. Mercier asked if the Historic District Commission can still regulate color and material and Mr. Miyares answered that you can regulate what signs look like just not the content. Mr. Tuttle asked if corporate architecture - like the McDonald's arches - is affected by the Supreme Court decision. Mr. Miyares noted that the decision is more or less silent on that. Ms. Cellos noted that'open' flags are going to be a problem. Mr. Safina suggested regulating the number of flags allowed or not allowing any at all. Mr. Hansen opined that the schedule for preparation for Town Meeting is very aggressive and asked if there was anything minor they can do to reduce the risk but buy more time. Mr. Miyares stated they could either stop enforcing the Sign Bylaw or impose a moratorium. Other Topics 4011 District Mr. Miyares clarified that the Commission is looking to expand the boundaries and maybe change /delete some of the existing definitions. Mr. Safina responded in the affirmative and noted that they may also want to create sub - districts in areas with existing residential structures. Mr. Miyares noted that the Commission can expand the boundaries now and add the sub - districts later and guidelines later. Ms. Delios indicated that the DHCD process can take a while. Mr. Safina suggested that the Commission continue the effort and see how the timing works out. CPDC Meedna Minutes - February 22, 2016 Mr. Tuttle moved that the CPDC approve the minutes of February 22, 2016 as amended. The motion was seconded by Mr. Salina and approved with a 3 -0 -1 vote with Ms. Goncalves -Dolan abstaining. Page 1 3 CPDC Meeting Minutes — February 23. 2016 Mr. Tuttle moved that the CPDC approve the minutes of February 23, 2016 as amended. The motion was seconded by Mr. Salina and approved with a 3 -0 -1 vote with Ms. ... Goncalves- Dolan abstaining. Plannina Updates Ms. Delios noted that the building department Is very busy issuing building permits. Professors Market is now open. The bridal shop at 258 -262 Main Street is still in the demo delay process. The Town has heard that the Walgreens space will be leased to a Dollar Tree. The Board of Selectmen has added an economic development position to the budget. Ms. Mercier noted that the Town's Community Compact application was approved by the State, and the Town's Complete Streets Policy received a score of 88, which is very good. The process of updating the Town's Hazard Mitigation Plan will be starting soon, and the Town has hired MAPC to help. Mr. Tuttle moved that the CPDC adjourn at 9:35 PM. The motion was seconded by Mr. Safina and approved with a 4 -0 -0 vote. Documents reviewed at the meeting: CPDC Agenda 3/7/16 CPDC Minutes 2/22/16 CPDC Minutes 2/23/16 Zoning Bylaw Amendment Subcommittee Timeline for November Town Meeting, dated March 1, 2016 Supercuts Sign Permit Application: a) Application for Sign Permit, dated 2/4/16. b) Memorandum from The Wilder Company to Viewpoint Sign and Awning, dated 11/30/15. c) Colored and dimensioned elevations of proposed wall sign, prepared by Viewpoint Sign and Awning, dated 10/09/15, and stamped by the Commission on 3/7/16. d) Photograph of the building before it was demised into 3 new tenant spaces. e) Draft Certificate of Appropriateness, prepared by Community Development Director Reading Square Barber Shop Sign Permit Application: a) Application for Sign Permit, dated 2/24/16. b) Colored, dimensioned and annotated elevations of the proposed wall and blade signs, prepared by DiCicco Sign Company, stamped by the Commission on 3/7/16. c) Photograph mock ups of the building and proposed signs, prepared by DiCicco Sign Company. d) Draft Certificate of Appropriateness, prepared by Community Development Director Sign Bylaw documentation: a) Letter from Miyares and Harrington, LLP to Jeffrey Hansen re: Supreme Court decision in Reed v. Town of Gilbert and implications for the Town of Reading Sign Bylaw, dated 2/4/16. b) International Municipal Lawyers Association (IMLA) Model Sign Code - 3r0 Rough Draft. c) Testa, Bridget Mintz. "Sign of the Times." Planning Magazine Feb. 2016: 19 -23. Print. Feedback Received since 2/22/16: a) Email from Dave Pullo of Dave's Home Services to Community Development Director, dated 2/22/16. Page 14