The foremost topic at the Danvers Planning Board meeting was the presentation of a signage package for Maple Square, a development on Maple Street. Developer Craig Fensteel from a15 presented a revised sign design that aimed to elevate the overall quality and uniformity of the building’s signage. The board, with Lou George remotely participating, expressed a strong desire for consistency across the development to enhance its aesthetic appeal.

Fensteel’s proposal included a “push through letter” method, which would create a silhouette effect, and plans for internal lighting with edge-lit, subtly illuminated letters. While the board acknowledged the need for uniformity, they also recognized the necessity for flexibility to accommodate individual tenant branding. This led to a discussion on whether the developer could work with town staff to create a general design standard, allowing similar signage for multiple tenants rather than requiring individual approvals.

Public comments, including those from Mark Gothia, highlighted concerns about maintaining the visual appeal of commercial properties over time, pointing to the need for ongoing standards to ensure the development remains attractive. The board did not immediately resolve these concerns but acknowledged the importance of this issue for future consideration.

Another issue discussed was the proposed amendment to zoning bylaws regarding dead-end streets. The board deliberated on whether to incorporate these changes into the zoning bylaw modifications for an upcoming special town meeting. Public input emphasized the dangers and inefficiencies associated with dead-end streets, both for emergency services and general traffic flow, as noted by residents recalling past incidents and expressing opposition to further development of such streets.

The meeting also addressed resident concerns about public notification for “approval not required” (ANR) subdivisions. David McKenna, a town meeting member, highlighted instances where subdivisions were approved without adequate public awareness, prompting discussions on the feasibility and implications of requiring public notification. The board acknowledged the lack of precedence for such a requirement and the potential administrative challenges, but recognized the value of community engagement and transparency.

In addition to discussing subdivisions and zoning bylaws, the board explored potential amendments to outdoor lighting standards. Residents living near commercial properties voiced complaints about light pollution from new LED lighting, which highlighted the absence of existing regulations on light spillage. The board considered a simplified version of an initially cumbersome lighting bylaw to address these issues, focusing on reducing light pollution without overwhelming technical details.

The conversation further ventured into redefining kennels, proposing to allow residents to keep four dogs instead of three without requiring a special permit, aligning with state definitions. This change aimed to clarify existing practices and address community concerns about pet ownership and potential commercial operations in residential areas.