Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA 06/12/2018Town ofMansfieldl RFU1VED Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes j O"Y=j ;. June 12, 2018 f�.( OF FICE 2618 DEC 18 P 3. 41 Present: Elisabeth Garber -Miller, Chair; Darlene Pruitt, Clerk; Matthew CumTings,;;,Philip S,Jannon; Aaron zr °til Gallagher; Ryan Maxwell. ! t z, 7(C 1. Call to order at 7:30 pm. 2. Mansfield Country Square B, LLC, 333 School Street The Chair read the hearing notice for the application of Mansfield Country Square B, LLC for a Variance from Section 230-4.7 B(2)(a), Signs, of the Zoning By -Law to allow for five (5) wall signs totaling 584.84 square feet where 399 square feet of wall signage is allowed: one (1) 26.25 square foot wall sign for "Elite Nail Spa"; one (1) 39.4 square foot wall sign for "Massachusetts National Guard"; and two (2) 88.8 square foot wall signs for "Massachusetts National Guard"; and one (1) 50.8 square foot sign for "The Offices 333 School Street" at 333 School Street (Assessor's Map 12, Parcel 12) in the Industrial 1(11) zone. The following documents were introduced at the public hearing: • Copy of public hearing notice, which ran in the Mansfield News on May 18, 2018 and May 25, 2018; • Application for Variance, fled with the Town Clerk's Office on April 13, 2018; • "The Pavilion Mansfield, MA "Building Signage Overview" and "The Pavilion Mansfield, MA Building Signage Detail" dated February 27, 2018. Attorney Edward Valanzola, Timothy Power, Management Company, and Major Brent Bundy, Massachusetts National Guard, were present. Attorney Valanzola said there are two buildings on the property. He explained Town Meeting voted to discontinue the portion of Old School Street on this property in exchange for a sewer easement in 2007. Attorney Valanzola said the frontage of the building determines the amount of signage a building can have. He said the Massachusetts National Guard is not a typical office tenant and needs to be visible, so just being listed on a directory in the lobby of the building or a small sign, which would be sufficient for most tenants, would not work for them. He said the second floor tenant would be the Massachusetts National Guard, the management company and additional office space. Attorney Valanzola said proposed sign #t5 will read "The Offices 333 School Street"; proposed sign f#4, on the second floor brick fagade, would be the Massachusetts National Guard sign; proposed sign H3 for the National Guard would face School Street above Hilliard's Chocolates; proposed sign p2 would be the Massachusetts National Guard sign on the left side second floor; proposed sign p1 would be for the new tenant, Elite Nails Spa. Attorney Valanzola said the hardship is the shape of the lot, loss of frontage, the soil conditions, and the sewer line that runs through the property. He said in order for the site to be developed, they had to build two buildings and when Old School Street was discontinued, they had to give the town an easement so they could continue to maintain the sewer line. He said the request will not derogate from the Zoning By -Law. Mr. Maxwell asked where the entrance for the Massachusetts National Guard would be located. Attorney Valanzola said they would use the main lobby entrance. Ms. Garber -Miller said the current tenants are the National Guard and the management company, with space for another tenant. Mr. Power said the office space was designed to be a shared office space, with the National Guard using approximately 1,000 square feet. The rest of the space includes five individual offices, currently being occupied by the management company and could include a single tenant office space. Ms. Garber -Miller asked Mr. Power if he was anticipating additional signage would be needed for the single tenant office space. Mr. Power said it would be a typical office with a directory on the front door. Ms. Pruitt asked about who the target audience was for the proposed second sign for the National Guard and whether the sign could be seen from Route 495. Attorney Valanzola said drivers coming down School Street from North Attleboro cannot see the sign until it is too late and the sign at the office entrance is not visible from the street. He said the second sign is the smaller of the three proposed signs. Mr. Power said the building is visible from Route 495. Ms. Garber -Miller asked if the signs would be internally illuminated and what hours they would be lit. Attorney Valanzola said the board can put conditions on the variance that the signs are to operate the same hours as the rest of the shopping center. There were no public comments Mr. Cummings made the motion to approve the application of Mansfield Country Square B, LLC for a Variance from Section 230-4.7 B(2)la), Signs, of the Zoning By -Law to allow for five (5) wall signs totaling 584.84 square feet where 399 square feet of wall signage is allowed: one (1) 26.25 square foot wall sign for "Elite Nail Spa"; one (1) 39.4 square foot wall sign for "Massachusetts National Guard"; and two (2) 88.8 square foot wall signs for "Massachusetts National Guard"; and one (1) 50.8 square foot sign for "The Offices 333 School Street" at 333 School Street (Assessor's Map 12, Parcel 12) in the Industrial 1 (11) zone, in accordance with the plan "Building Signage Overview" and "Building Signage Detail" dated February 27, 2018. Mr. Gallagher seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. Gallagher said the proposed signage for the Massachusetts National Guard and the office area would not be out of character for the area. He said he understands the reasoning for the sign for the second floor and has no issues with the Elite Nail Spa sign. Mr. Cummings said the three signs for the National Guard is a lot. Ms. Pruitt said she is concerned about the second 88.8 square -foot wall sign on the left side of the building for the National Guard. Ms. Garber -Miller said her concern is that when you start making each sign dependent on the tenant for the space at any given time, the tenant could change but the variance runs with the property not the tenant. Mr. Gallagher said the board has the opportunity to deny the request for more signage. He said the one sign he would be concerned with would be the second sign on the left of the building. Mr. Maxwell said the second sign is bothersome because it seems to be an extra sign and it is not visible. Mr. Cummings said he would not be opposed to the applicant choosing which of the two 88.9 square -foot signs they prefer to exclude. Attorney Valanzola said the sign on the left side of the building faces Route 495, which is why it is important. He said the board could approve two out of the three proposed signs and let the applicant decide which sign to eliminate. Mr. Cummings said the applicant can remove either of the 88.8 square -foot signs. Mr. Cummings amended his motion to approve the application of Mansfield Country Square B, LLC for a Variance for 333 School Street from Section 230-4.7 B(2), Signs, of the Zoning By -Law on condition the applicant removes one of the 88.8 square -foot Massachusetts National Guard signs to allow for four 4 wall signs totaling 496.04 square feet where 399 square feet of wall signage is allowed: one (1) 26.25 square foot wall sign for "Elite Nail Spa"; one (1) 39.4 square foot wall sign for "Massachusetts National Guard"; and one (1) 88.8 square foot wall sign for "Massachusetts National Guard"; and one (1) 50.8 square foot sign for "The Offices 333 School Street" at 333 School Street (Assessor's Map 12, Parcel 12) in the Industrial 1 (11) zone, in accordance with the plan "Building Signage Overview" and "Building Signage Detail" dated February 27, 2018. Mr. Gallagher seconded the motion. Motion passed 4-1-0 (Garber -Miller) 3. Guerrini Landscape, Inc., 2 Lawndale Road The Chair read the hearing notice for the application of Guerrini Landscape, Inc. for a Variance from the Zoning By - Law Section 230-4.2A, Density and Dimensional Regulations, Business Districts, Side and Rear Yard Setbacks, to allow for the construction of a 52'x40' building with an 11'rear yard setback where 20' is required and a 6' side yard setback where 20' is required at 2 Lawndale Road (Assessor's Map 31, Parcel 9) in the Business 3 (63) zone. The following documents were introduced at the public hearing: • Copy of public hearing notice, which ran in the Mansfield News on May 18, 2018 and May 25, 2018; • Application for Variance, filed with the Town Clerk's Office on April 18, 2018; • "Zoning Plan Guerrini Landscape, Inc. 2 Lawndale Road" dated April 17, 2018, revised June 11, 2018, prepared by Hutchins -Trowbridge Associates Inc. Michael Trowbridge, Hutchins -Trowbridge Associates, Inc., Kevin Guerrini and Colin Casper, Guerrini Landscape, Inc., were present. Mr. Trowbridge said there has been a revision to the plan that will eliminate one of the variance requests. He said there were discussions with an abutter to the rear of the property and Mr. Guerrini agreed to pull the building forward to meet the rear yard setback and keep the building in line with the existing blocks. The only difference is that a new section of blocks will have a roof over it to keep the materials dry. Mr. Trowbridge explained that because this is in a business zone, all buildings are treated as primary, rather than accessory buildings; he noted if this were a residential zone, the accessory building could be five feet from the lot line. He said, although this would be a permanent building and a building permit is necessary, it is basically a shell with a canopy. He said the building will be painted green to blend in with the existing landscaping. Mr. Trowbridge said Mr. Guerrini has been in business for 40 years, the business is expanding and he has tried to be a good neighbor. Mr. Trowbridge said the building would be approximately 250 feet off Lawndale Road in the right rear corner of the property, as far back as possible from the roadway. He said the building cannot be pulled back from the northerly lot line because of the existing buildings and the space needed to maneuver heavy equipment. Mr. Trowbridge said they are proposing to plant 10 -foot evergreens, eight feet on center, at the rear of the property to buffer the residential houses on Franklin Street. He said if this were considered an accessory structure, the applicant would not need a variance. He said this project will not derogate from the intent of the Zoning By - Law. He said the use, bulk material storage, is allowed in a Business 3 zone and the property to the north is also B3. Mr. Maxwell asked if the property to the north is also a business. Mr. Trowbridge said it is. Jared Paolin, 15 Franklin Street, asked if the materials to be stored will be the same as the materials currently being stored on the site and if utilities would have to be installed. Mr. Trowbridge said the materials, such as mulch and sand, will be the same and no utilities are necessary. Mr. Paulin asked the time frame and hours of construction. Mr. Trowbridge said the construction would take approximately five days and the applicant would agree to a start time of 7:30 am. Mr. Paolin said they have never had a problem with Guerrini Landscape and they have been very courteous neighbors. Stephen Spink, 25 Franklin Street, agreed with Mr. Paolin and said Mr. Guerrini has acknowledged the impact this would have on the neighbors. Mr. Spink said the proposed building will be very visible, not only to the neighbors, but for pedestrians on Franklin Street and in St. Mary's Cemetery. Mr. Spink said because of the removal of trees, the applicant will have to try to minimize the impact to the abutters. He said the abutters need some assurance or an understanding that Mr. Guerrini will continue to work with the neighbors. He said there might be a need for something more than the proposed 10' shrub buffer. He said foliage cuts down on noise and dust and the applicant has installed sprinklers, which also will help. He said they do not have any major objections to the project. Mr. Guerrini said only the dead trees will be removed. Mr. Cummings made the motion to approve the application of Guerrini Landscape, Inc. for a Variance from the Zoning By -Law Section 230-4.2A, Density and Dimensional Regulations, Business Districts, Side and Rear Yard Setbacks, to allow for the construction of a 52'x40' building with an 11'rear yard setback where 20' is required and a 6' side yard setback where 20' is required at 2 Lawndale Road (Assessor's Map 31, Parcel 9) in the Business 3 (83) zone, in accordance with the plan,"Zoning Plan Guerrini Landscape, Inc. 2 Lawndale Road" dated April 17, 2018 and revised June 11, 2018, prepared by Hutchins -Trowbridge Associates Inc. Mr. Gallagher seconded the motion. Discussion: Ms. Garber -Miller said the material is already there, the proposed building will be set back as far back off the road as possible and the site abuts a strip mall. She said the abutters' concerns have been addressed and Mr. Guerrini is willing to address any further concerns about the landscape buffering. Mr. Shannon said the materials will be self-contained and the project will be an improvement for the space. Motion passed 5-0-0. Hearing ended at 8:06 pm 4. Peter Kuplast, 61 Campbell Street The Chair read the hearing notice for the application of Peter Kuplast for a Finding/Variance from Zoning By -Law Sections 230-7.2(4), Findings, for the change, extension, alteration or reconstruction of a pre-existing, non- conforming structure and 230-4.2A, Front Yard Setback, for an addition with less than the required front yard setback at 61 Campbell Street (Assessor's Map 20, Parcel 105) in the Residential 2 (132) zone. The following documents were introduced at the public hearing: • Application for a Finding, filed with the Town Clerk's Office on April 27, 2018; • Copy of public hearing notice, which ran in the Mansfield News on May 18, 2018 and May 25, 2018; • "Proposed House Addition at No. 61 Campbell Street at Mansfield, MA" dated April 24, 2018, prepared by RIM Engineering Co., Inc. Homeowner Peter Kuplast explained the application is for a Finding for a second floor addition to the pre-existing, non -conforming house. The existing house is 24.8 feet to the front property line and with the addition, will be 20.8 feet; the required front yard setback is 30 feet. The existing front stairs have a setback of 17.5'; the new front stairs will have a setback of 17.6'. He said the rest of the proposed addition complies with all zoning setbacks. There were no public comments. Mr. Cummings made the motion that the request for a Finding at 61 Campbell Street is an increase in a pre- existing, non -conforming condition. Mr. Gallagher seconded the motion. Motion passed 5-0-0. Mr. Cummings made the motion that the increase in the pre-existing, non -conforming condition per the plan, "Proposed House Addition at No. 61 Campbell Street, Mansfield, MA" dated April 24, 2018, prepared by RIM Engineering Co., Inc. at 61 Campbell Street is not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the current condition and the change is de minimis. Mr. Gallagher seconded the motion. Discussion: Ms. Garber -Miller said considering the size of the proposed addition, they are not going any closer to the front property line. Motion passed 5-0-0. Hearing ended at 8:10 pm. 5. Thomas and Cristiana Wilson, 380 Williams Street The Chair read the hearing notice for the application of Thomas and Cristiana Wilson for a Variance from Zoning By -Law Section 230-4.2.1, Side Yard Setback, for the construction of an addition with a 17.9 foot side yard setback where 25 feet is required at 380 Williams Street (Assessor's Map 2, Parcel 75) in the Residential 1(R1) zone. The following documents were introduced at the public hearing: • Copy of public hearing notice, which ran in the Mansfield News on May 18, 2018 and May 25, 2018; • Application for Variance, filed with the Town Clerk's Office on May 1, 2018; • "Proposed House Addition at No. 380 Williams Street in Mansfield, MA dated April 27, 2018, prepared by RIM Engineering Co., Inc. Homeowner Thomas Wilson explained he is proposing a 14'x14' addition on the left side of the house, which will be attached to a proposed 28'x26' garage. The proposed garage will be 17.5 from the property line, where 25 feet is required. Mr. Wilson said before he filed the request for a variance, he spoke with the direct abutter, Russell Rose, 370 Williams Street, who said he does not have a problem with the project. Ms. Garber -Miller asked about the 14'x14' addition. Mr. Wilson said currently they have a half bath downstairs, which they would like to make into a full bath, pantry and mudroom. Mr. Cummings asked if Mr. Wilson had considered moving the addition behind the house where the deck is located. Mr. Wilson said the addition cannot be any further back because his septic system is located in the back of the house. He said there are three large maple trees in the front yard and if he pulled the garage back the trees would probably have to be removed. He said his house is not very big with a small kitchen and the addition will allow him to remove the back door and make the kitchen larger. Mr. Gallagher asked if there would be anything above the garage. Mr. Wilson said it will just be a garage. Mr. Gallagher asked if the existing driveway would be removed. Mr. Wilson said he will not replace the driveway; it will stay where it is at the street then be brought up to the new garage doors. Mr. Wilson said the abutter's driveway and house are approximately 100 feet and 200 feet from his house. Ms. Garber -Miller said Ms. Pruitt noticed that on the request for the variance the applicant asked for an addition with a 17.9 -foot side yard setback but the plan shows a 17.5' setback. Mr. Wilson said the setback at the front of the house is 17.5 feet and 17.9 feet in the back because the lot is not square. There were no public comments Mr. Cummings made the motion to approve the application of Thomas and Cristiana Wilson for a Variance from Zoning By -Law Section 230-4.2.1, Side Yard Setback, for the construction of an addition with a 17.9 foot side yard setback where 25 feet is required at 380 Williams Street (Assessor's Map 2, Parcel 75) in the Residential 1 (111) zone, in accordance with the plan, "Proposed House Addition at No. 380 Williams Street in Mansfield, MA dated April 27, 2018, prepared by RIM Engineering Co., Inc. Mr. Gallagher seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. Shannon said the proposed addition/garage is close to the property line, but the neighbor was not at tonight's meeting with any concerns. Mr. Gallagher said he understands the need for the 14'x14' addition. He said the lot line is at an angle and, because the septic field is in the back, the addition could not be moved towards the back. He said he does not have a problem with the variance request. Mr. Shannon said the dimensions need to be changed. Ms. Garber -Miller said the setback should be 17.5 feet rather than 17.9 feet. Motion passed 5-0-0. Hearing ended at 8:18 pm. 6. John Stanovitch, 2 Pheasant Hollow Drive The Chair read the public hearing notice for the application of John Stanovitch, Jr. for a Variance from Zoning By - Law Section 230-4.2A, Density and Dimensional Regulations: Lot Frontage, Lot Area and Lot Width, for the creation of a lot with less than the required frontage, area and lot width at 2 Pheasant Hollow Drive (Assessor's Map 3, Parcel 287) in the Residential 1 (131) and Residential 2 (R2) zones. The following documents were introduced at the public hearing: Copy of public hearing notice, which ran in the Mansfield News on May 18, 2018 and May 25, 2018; • Application for Variance, filed with the Town Clerk's Office on May 2, 2018; • "Zoning Plan 2 Pheasant Hollow Drive" dated April 30, 2018, prepared by Hutchins -Trowbridge Associates, Inc. • Email dated June 12, 2018 from Denise Mowles in support of the Stanovitch request for a variance. Michael Trowbridge, Hutchins -Trowbridge Associates, Inc., representing Mr. Stanovitch, explained this is actually not the creation of a new lot; the lot was created many years ago by way of Form A. He said the R1/R2 zone line runs through the property and in 1994 150 feet of frontage and 45,000 square feet were required. Mr. Trowbridge said over the years, Mr. Stanovitch has accumulated several parcels of land hoping someday his children would build on the properties; he said the intent is for this land to be a separate lot with frontage on Pheasant Hollow Drive. Mr. Trowbridge said the property has been taxed as separate lots for the past 24 years. He said Mr. Stanovitch is trying to keep the farm area intact and utilize the property as it was presented and approved in 1994. Ms. Garber -Miller asked if the land abutting to the right of the property could be added to the frontage on Pheasant Hollow Drive to make the lot conforming. Mr. Trowbridge said with the addition of 50 feet of frontage, the lot would still require a lot width variance. He said Mr. Stanovitch purchased these parcels many years ago, assembling parcels that his children would be able to build on, but Mr. Stanovitch did not put each parcel in separate ownership and the properties have now merged. Mr. Trowbridge said this will not derogate from the intent of zoning. He said the lot was created as a buildable lot and is still much bigger than most of the lots in the neighborhood. He said a portion of this lot is in an R2 zone, which requires 30, 000 square feet of area and 150 feet of frontage. Mr. Trowbridge submitted an email from abutter Denise Mowles, 49 Otis Street, who said she had no concerns with the variance request. Kim Rathbun, 93 Otis Street, said she has known the Stanovitches for 40 years and has absolutely no problem with the request for a variance. Ms. Garber -Miller asked the reason why the extra 50 -foot strip of land is not accompanying this new lot; she said there would be enough frontage and be closer to the total acreage needed if the strip were added to the lot, but there would still be the lot width issue. Mr. Trowbridge said the reason it was kept separate was because Mr. Stanovitch was looking for another access into the farmland; he said there is substantial acreage there, but it is not big enough to put a subdivision roadway in, if that would be a concern of the board. Ms. Garber -Miller said the lot width issue would still exist, but the extra 50 feet would provide enough frontage and bring the lot closer to the required area. Mr. Cummings made the motion to approve the application of John Stanovitch, Jr. for a Variance from Zoning By - Law Section 230-4.2A, Density and Dimensional Regulations: Lot Frontage, Lot Area and Lot Width, for the creation of a lot with less than the required frontage, area and lot width at 2 Pheasant Hollow Drive (Assessor's Map 3, Parcel 287) in the Residential 1 (131) and Residential 2 (R2) zones, in accordance with the plan, "Zoning Plan 2 Pheasant Hollow Drive" dated April 30, 2018, prepared by Hutchins -Trowbridge Associates, Inc. Mr. Gallagher seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. Cummings asked if they could deed over the extra 50 feet and put in a right-of-way for access to the farm. Mr. Gallagher said this would not solve the issue because they would still not meet the width requirement and they would create a non -conforming lot from a lot that is currently conforming. Mr. Shannon said the 50 -foot strip tapers down further back into the lot, so it is not a true 50 feet Mr. Cummings said the hardship is the shape of the lot Mr. Gallagher said legally the lots have merged with the rest of the properties owned by Mr. Stanovitch. He noted the majority of the lot is in the R1 zone. Mr. Cummings said in the past when the board had denied similar requests, it was because the applicants were proposing to create two non -conforming lots; he said this request will create only one non -conforming lot. Ms. Garber -Miller asked if the board would be inclined to create a non -conforming lot if the additional 50 -foot strip of land was attached to the proposed lot and an easement was created for access. Mr. Gallagher said it would still be non -conforming for lot width, but the lot would have the required frontage and area. Ms. Garber - Miller said the lot would still be short 5,000 square feet in area because the requirement in an R1 zone is 60,000 square feet. Mr. Maxwell said the proposed new lot would fit in with the neighborhood; he said technically they are in an R2 zone and the by-law does not talk about dual zones. Mr. Maxwell said he does not believe anything would be gained by making the applicant come back with another variance request. Mr. Gallagher said he would approve the variance as presented. Motion passed 5-0-0. Hearing ended at 8:32 pm. 7. Ashley DeAndrade, 200 Gilbert Street The Chair read the hearing notice for the application of Ashley DeAndrade on behalf of M&P Holdings, Inc. for a Variance from Section 230-4.7B (1), Signs, of the Zoning By -Law to allow a second freestanding sign with less than the required ten foot (10') setback from the street at 200 Gilbert Street (Assessor's Map 3, Parcel 122) in the Industrial 2 (12) zone. The following documents were introduced at the public hearing: • Copy of public hearing notice, which ran in the Mansfield News on May 18, 2018 and May 25, 2018; • Application for Variance, filed with the Town Clerk's Office on May 3, 2018; • Sheet 01 and 02 of 02, dated November 13, 2017 and Sheets 01 of 04 and 02 of 04, dated February 1, 2018, prepared by Sign Design; • "Zoning Petition Plan in Mansfield, MA Bristol County 200 Gilbert Street (Assessors Map 3, Lot 122);' dated April 30, 2018 and prepared by E.T. Engineering Enterprises,lnc. Ashley DeAndrade, Sign Design, representing Jordi Labs, said she came before the board last month with a certified plot plan showing two signs, one for the main entrance and a receiving sign at the second entrance; both signs would be 6 feet from the property line where 10 feet is required. She said the main entrance sign complies with all the zoning requires other than its location, six feet from the property line. Ms. DeAndrade said the signs are non -illuminated and are not located in a residential area so no neighbors would be affected. There were no public comments. Mr. Cummings made the motion to approve the application of Ashley DeAndrade on behalf of M&P Holdings, Inc. for a Variance from Section 230-4.76 (1), Signs, of the Zoning By -Law to allow a second freestanding sign with less than the required ten foot (10') setback from the street at 200 Gilbert Street (Assessor's Map 3, Parcel 122) in the Industrial 2 (12) zone. Mr. Gallagher seconded the motion. Discussion: Ms. Garber -Miller said the applicant is asking for a second sign to direct truck traffic and the sign complies in all other respects to the zoning by-law. Motion passed 5-0-0. Hearing ended at 8:35 pm. 8. Becca Clifford, Sign Design, Inc., 200 Gilbert Street, Map 3, Parcel 122 The application of Becca Clifford, Sign Design, Inc., on behalf of M & P Holdings, Inc. for a Variance from Section 230-4.7B (1), Signs, of the Zoning By -Law to allow one freestanding sign with less than the required ten foot (10') setback from the street at 200 Gilbert Street (Assessor's Map 3, Parcel 122) in the Industrial 2 (12) zone. The following documents were introduced at the public hearing: • Copy of public hearing notice, which ran in the Mansfield News on February 16, 2018 and February 23, 2018; • Application for Variance, filed with the Town Clerk's Office on February 2, 2018; • Sheet 01 of 04 and Sheet 02 of 04 "Jordi Labs 200 Gilbert Street Mansfield, MA" plan dated February 1, 2018 and prepared by Sign Design and "Zoning Petition Plan" dated April 30, 2018, prepared by E.T. Engineering Enterprises, Inc.; • March 29, 2018 request from Kathleen Duperron, Jordi Labs, LLC, requesting the public hearing be continued to May 1, 2018 • May 1, 2018 request from Ashley DeAndrade, Sign Design, requesting the public hearing be continued to June 12, 2018. Ashley DeAndrade, Sign Design, was present. Ms. Garber -Miller said this is a continued public hearing for the main entrance sign at 200 Gilbert Street, which will be six feet from the property line where 10 feet is required; the sign is compliant with all other respects with the zoning by-law. There were no public comments. Mr. Gallagher made the motion to approve the application of Becca Clifford, Sign Design, Inc., on behalf of M & P Holdings, Inc. for a Variance from Section 230-4.713 (1), Signs, of the Zoning By -Law to allow one freestanding sign with less than the required ten foot (10') setback from the street at 200 Gilbert Street (Assessor's Map 3, Parcel 122) in the Industrial 2 (12) zone. Mr. Cummings seconded the motion. Discussion: Ms. Garber -Miller said the applicant has done everything the board asked them to do. Motion passed 5-0-0. Hearing ended at 8:38 pm 9. Wireless Telecommunications Structure, Eco -Site, Inc., 251 Branch Street, Map 34, Parcels 10 and 101. This application was for a Variance from Zoning By -Law Section 230-3.6(G)(4)(g), Wireless Communication Towers, to allow the construction of a wireless telecommunications facility with less than the required setback from the nearest residential structure at 251 Branch Street (Assessor's Map 34, Parcels 10 and 101) in the Industrial 2 (12) zone. The Applicant has requested a continuance to July 31, 2018. Mr. Cummings made the motion to accept the request for 251 Branch Street to continue the hearing to July 31, 2018. Mr. Gallaher seconded the motion. Motion passed 5-0-0. 10. Old Business: Ms. Garber -Miller asked that language be added to the May minutes to more closely reflect that they submitted an updated plan. Minutes were not approved. 11. Adjournment: Motion to adjourn at 8:50 pm: (Cummings/Gallagher) Motion passed 5-0. 11�oxt Meeting will be July 31, 2018. arlen Pruitt, Clerk Date