07:50The primary focus of the meeting was the application by BMR for a new mounted tenant directory sign on North Gaston Avenue. The proposed sign, measuring 40 square feet, is intended to enhance visibility for tenants in a property that houses multiple businesses, including a pizza shop and a gun shop. The application for the sign highlights the need to improve tenant visibility due to the property’s shallow depth and existing structure, which present challenges for attracting customer attention. BMR representatives argued that the sign would advance public health, safety, and general welfare by aiding drivers and potential customers in locating the building, thereby promoting economic vitality and aligning with the goals of the Municipal Land Use Act.

49:31Despite these arguments, the board expressed concerns about the current design of the sign, which several members found aesthetically unpleasing. Suggestions were made for alternative designs that would better complement the building’s architecture, such as a ground-mounted wooden sign or one featuring historic elements and pin lighting. The board emphasized the necessity of a design that would be both functional and visually appealing.

Parallel to the discussion on signage, the meeting addressed traffic safety issues linked to recent changes in traffic patterns. Concerns were raised about the removal of traffic signs near the property, which were reported to have created hazardous conditions. Public comments, including those from a concerned resident, highlighted the need for temporary measures such as traffic cones until a formal review could take place.

16:13The historical context of the property’s zoning resolutions also formed part of the deliberations. The board discussed past conditional approvals, noting that some conditions, particularly those related to landscaping and tree planting, remained unmet. The applicant acknowledged these shortcomings, proposing to plant four trees instead of the originally mandated eight, due to practical limitations imposed by the proximity of the building to the street. The proposal included a financial contribution to the Environmental Commission as compensation for the reduced number of trees, although some board members questioned the feasibility of such an arrangement given the original resolution’s stipulations.

30:11Further complicating the signage and traffic discussions was the revelation that the driveway accessing William Street, initially approved for one-way access, was functioning as a two-way road. This discrepancy prompted concerns about potential traffic issues, with the board emphasizing the need for accurate traffic markings and expert analysis to ensure the safety and clarity of access routes.

01:05:45The board also examined the broader implications of zoning regulations in the area, considering the potential need for rezoning certain business districts to better align with existing residential patterns. This discussion included concerns about the impact of commercial developments on predominantly residential neighborhoods and the potential for conflicts between different land uses.

In light of these considerations, the board decided to continue the application to allow BMR to refine their proposal based on feedback received during the meeting. Acknowledging the importance of review and community input, the board scheduled the next meeting for August 20th, allowing time for additional data collection and revisions. The continuation also involved discussions on whether renoticing would be required, given the community interest and ongoing concerns about compliance with previous resolutions.