2022-12-08-ZBA-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Ms. Guglielmo stated the Design Advisory Committee requested they take out the illumination but it is already there as previously approved under a Special Permit. They are not making any changes to that and would like to keep it that way. Ms. Guglielmo stated there are two internally illuminated shell pectin signs on the fuel canopy. They required Special Permits because they are beyond the max of two permitted wall signs, they are internally illuminated and are larger than allowed. They are permitted as part of a Special Permit in 2002. They are a branding standard for Shell. Waltham Street is busy and these signs help drivers to identify the brand. The Design Advisory Committee recommended to remove these signs and to remove internal lighting on the pump canopy. Although they were okay with the up lighting on the red band. They are internally illuminated today. The understanding is the Design Advisory Committee would be amendable to keep these signs if they could reduce the height of the facia of the canopy. That is something they are able to achieve. They can reduce is from 45.5 inches to 33.5 inches. Ms. Guglielmo stated they are proposing a welcome sign that is part of the canopy and it needs a Special Permit because it is an additional secondary sign. This sign is to draw customers to the entrance. There was no comment from Design Advisory Committee. Chair, Ralph D. Clifford, question if there was illumination (Can lights would be used). Ms. Guglielmo stated they are proposing the Seasons sign. It has channel letters. It needs a Special Permit because it is larger than allowed and is internally illuminated. This sign identifies the convenience store use and is proportional to the scale of the building. This has been reduced from typical sign sizes. The Design Advisory Committee recommended this should not be internally illuminated. It is obstructed by the canopy and landscape so it requires lighting to make the sign more visible. It will only be lit during operation hours. Ms. Guglielmo stated they are proposing a Corner Market sign located at the center of the building. I will have acrylic letters. The Special Permit is required because it is beyond the number of secondary wall signs and larger than allowed. This sign identifies the convenience store use. It is externally illuminated and there were no comments from the Design Advisory Committee. Ms. Guglielmo stated they are proposing a Dunkin’ sign on the right side of the building. It requires a Special Permit because it is beyond the allowed number of secondary wall signs, it is internally illuminated, and is larger than allowed. This sign identifies the use. It is the same size as the existing. It is proportional to the scale building. The Design Advisory Committee recommended no illumination of this sign. Illumination helps to provide visibility on this corner with the obstructions. The sign will only be lit during operation hours. Ms. Guglielmo discussed light trespass. The Special Permit request is to allow light trespass from proposed light fixtures over the property line. She showed a photometrics plan and discussed the lights that will cause light trespass. Mr. Barnert questioned the light spill over in the residential area (Most of the light spill over is between 0.0 and 0.1 and by the time you cross the property line it is at 0.0. The only fixtures in the back are the gooseneck lights that shine down).