Once the zoning ramifications of the Cranberry Highway Smart Growth Overlay District were settled, the road was paved for Steen Realty and Development Corporation seeking special permits from the Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals for two monument signs sought on behalf of Rochester Crossroads LLC at 22 Cranberry Highway.
In a continued public hearing during the ZBA’s March 25 meeting, Steen representative Phil Cordeiro of Alan & Major Associates clarified that Brockton-based Sign Design is creating a strip LED panel with illumination behind white panels, the voltage adjustable to meet the requirement of the law.
“We don’t have a mock-up of that sign at present, and it’s our understanding under the (Rochester Zoning) bylaw that 22.60 D.9 allows the replacement of the sign, a swap-out of the sign so long as the square footage of the sign remains the same. And that’s what would be happening with that sign on (Route) 495,” said Cordeiro, who told the ZBA that the signs will advertise Rochester Crossroads Apartments and the businesses at Rochester Crossroads.
What ZBA Chairman David Arancio questioned was how zoning might affect the size of the signs that should be allowed under Chapter 22.60 Section E.3, in which signs exceeding 9 square feet were proposed. Steen proposed entry signs at 50 and 46 square feet.
Arancio pointed out that the parcel was rezoned at Rochester Town Meeting as the Cranberry Highway Smart Growth Overlay District, and deferred to ZBA member Richard Cutler, the chairman of the Bylaw Review Committee. Cutler told Arancio that the overlay district is still in a commercial district of the town. “So, the 50-foot sign limitations, in my opinion, are still correct,” said Cutler.
With that, granting the special permits was only a matter of arriving upon clarifications of location, hours of illumination, and appropriate screening for neighboring homes.
Arancio followed up on ZBA Vice Chairman Davis Sullivan’s question, confirming that the lighting and location would stay the same.
“I would say absolutely,” said developer Ken Steen. “I wouldn’t see any reason to change anything. I think it’s just a function, as Phil just explained … it would be a function of modifying the sign so that the tenant panels match up with the tenants that we end up with on our site, as opposed to what they are now.”
Steen also pointed to the lengthy Planning Board process resulting in a taller sign.
“As a result of the Planning Board requiring us to relocate the ring road, which is presently closer to the Seasons Market, it’s being relocated approximately 125 feet to the north,” he explained, alluding to Seasons’ concerns about potential customers missing the entryway, costing the store in business. “That was really the basis of it, and part of the solution was to offer them tenant panels on the sign, which did in fact increase the size of the sign.”
Cutler proposed stipulations for the signs, three that would be common to both.
For the larger Sign No. 1 located on Lot No. 41.C4, Cutler proposed the following conditions: 1. Screening per the Planning Board shall be provided and maintained to shield the sign from view of residential homes within Rochester boundaries east of Route 28 (i.e., houses on Old County Road); 2. The business sign shall be illuminated only when the business represented on the sign is open; 3. No additional signs for businesses in the Rochester Crossroads complex are allowed under this permit, but business may apply for additional permits either individually or as a group; and 4. All other conditions of the Rochester Zoning Bylaws are to be met.
The ZBA voted unanimously to approve the special permit for Sign No. 1 with Cutler’s stipulations.
Sign No. 2, under similar circumstances, located on Lot No. 41.C3 on Route 28, was also approved. Stipulations 2, 3, and 4 apply to Sign No. 2, and the ZBA again voted 5-0 in favor of the special permit.
Arancio and Gilmore credited Cordeiro for his thorough presentation.
The ZBA has no more continued cases and no new cases at present, so the next meeting of the board has not yet been scheduled.
Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals
By Mick Colageo