Members absent: Steve Hine.
Darcie Roy, of National Sign, described her proposal to reface an existing 4' by 6'-3 3/4 (25 s. f.) freestanding sign. She noted the DRAC had requested additional information regarding alternative options with regards to the lettering. She described the 1st proposal as having staggered lettering with a watermark. The 2nd proposal uses centered lettering without a watermark. Ms. Roy noted that the top of the proposed sign mimics the roofline of the shopping plaza except for the color. Ms. Boyle noted that she is not a fan of the proposed sign and asked if there might be a better form. Joe Hickey stated that the proposed lettering was larger than what he would prefer. Bruce Bockstael noted that the shopping plaza owner had a right to request permission for the maximum size font that could fit within the existing sign box so the sign could be seen from a greater distance. Mr. Bockstael stated that he felt the two proposals seem better balanced than the option seen at the previous meeting. Joe Hickey noted that he prefers the sign with centered lettering. Bruce Bockstael then read comments made by Steve Hine in an email to Denise Bradley and Peter Gillespie dated December 6, 2006, into the record as follows:
Bruce Bockstael made a motion to approve either the 1st option proposed having staggered lettering with a watermark or the 2nd option proposed that depicts centered lettering without a watermark provided the roof pediment emulates that of the shopping center roof. Joe Hickey seconded the motion and all voted in favor.
A discussion ensued regarding a memo dated November 27, 2006, from Michael Turner, Director of Public Works that cited ten (10) areas of concern. Denise Bradley noted that the applicants were unable to obtain the necessary parking required to locate the proposed use at 312 Silas Deane Highway and that the new proposed site was created in a "free-cut" lot split in 2005. Ms. Bradley noted that the Planning Department had reviewed the plans dated October 13, 2006, and had notified the applicant of any required revisions. Bruce Bockstael noted that Steve Hine had brought up concerns in an email to Denise Bradley and Peter Gillespie dated December 6, 2006, regarding signage, proposed landscaping and handicap accessibility. Denise Bradley noted that architectural plans had not yet been received and that the DRAC would have an opportunity to review the design prior to the application being forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Commission for Special Permit approval. The DRAC thanked the applicant for presenting the site plan and noted that they will be required to submit a revised site plan, architectural plans and any proposed signage for full review.
Richard Lagana noted that the building tenants include ORECK and Sterling Jewelers and reported that he had recently invested approximately $70,000-80,000 in renovations. Mr. Lagana then described photographs that had been distributed to the DRAC showing existing conditions warranting repairs as follows:
Denise Bradley noted that this matter had been referred to the DRAC by the Economic Development and Improvement Commission (EDIC) as part of the review process for the Silas Deane Highway Improvement Matching Loan Program. Andrea Boyle stated that the new roof units should be screened. Joe Hickey noted that the proposal falls within the intent of the loan program and will be a good visual improvement to the corridor. The DRAC expressed a consensus to forward a positive referral back to the EDIC and made note that all proposed improvements should be applicable except for the roof repair because it will not be an improvement visible from the road.