Zoning Board of Appeals

~ CITY OF PITTSFIELD ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, 70 ALLEN STREET, PITTSFIELD, MA 01201 PITTSFIELD ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES CITY HALL, ROOM 203 WEDNESDAY MAY 21, 2025, 7:00 PM Vice-Chair FitzGerald called the meeting to order at 7:00pm. He informed all attending that their pictures and voices were being recorded. Roll Call: Members Present: John Fitzgerald, Vice-Chair Esther Anderson Allyson Holmes Albert Ingegni, III, Chair Tom Goggins Kathleen DeWitt-Allen (Associate Member) Cory Evangelisto (Associate Member) Members Not Present: A quorum was present. Also Present: Amber Spring, City of Pittsfield Acceptance of Minutes, March 19, 2025, meeting Mr. FitzGerald made a motion to approve the minutes as presented; it was seconded by Ms. Anderson. Voting in favor of the motion were Chair Al Ingegni, John Fitzgerald, Tom Goggins, Esther Anderson, and Allyson Holmes. The motion passed with 5 affirmative votes. Public Hearing: Sign Dynamics, Inc – Pittsfield Massachusetts Storage LLC Application #3039 428 Merrill Road Sign Exception Sections 2 and 5.4 Request for Sign Exceptions to adjust calculations and grant additional square footage to allow installation of a proposed wall sign. Page 1 of 4 S:\DCD\Planning Division\ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS\Meeting Minutes\2025\5-21-2025\Minutes 5-21-2025.docx Chair Ingegni read the staff analysis into the record. John Lemanski, Sign Dynamics came forward to discuss the application. They are painting the backer panels and the building, same paint and color. The ribbed construction of the building makes putting letters on the building unfeasible. John and Janet Macht, 390 Merrill Rd LLC came forward to support the application. They are abutters and have no objection to the sign. Ms. Anderson commented the exceptions make sense because the backer boards will be painted to match the building and are needed to mount the lettering, and they need some extra size because the address of the property is misleading. Mr. Goggins commented in this instance the backer panel is more architectural in nature. Seeing no further debate or discussion, Mr. Goggins made a motion to approve the exceptions to section 2 and section 5.4 to install the proposed sign with the special condition noted below; it was seconded by Ms. Anderson. Voting in favor of the motion were Chair Al Ingegni, John Fitzgerald, Tom Goggins, Esther Anderson, and Allyson Holmes. The motion passed with 5 affirmative votes.  Illuminated signs shall employ only lights emitting a constant intensity and shall be either turned off between 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m, or sufficiently dimmed or screened so as to prevent a beam or illumination from shining into any adjacent residence.  The applicant would be subject to all other federal, state and local rules and regulations not specifically covered by the granting of an exception Pixley Signs – Lipton Energy Application #3040 580 North Street Sign Exception Sections 2, 4.11, 4.13, 4.4 and 5.4 Request for Sign Exceptions except existing non-conforming signage, adjust calculations, and add square footage to allow refacing of a wall sign. Chair Ingegni read the staff analysis into the record. Heather Pixley, Pixley Signs came forward to discuss the application. The owner plans on raising the entire location and building a new structure, which affects the wall sign. The Mart is rebranding. They propose removing the existing sign and replacing it with a temporary digital print sign, same size. Ms. Anderson is concerned about XXXX (23:00) A discussion was held regarding the square footage of the sign. Page 2 of 4 S:\DCD\Planning Division\ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS\Meeting Minutes\2025\5-21-2025\Minutes 5-21-2025.docx Ms. Pixley suggested a hardship exemption. (28:30) It was agreed the signs on the building are fine; it’s the pylon sign that is the problem. Seeing no further debate or discussion, Mr. Goggins made a motion that the pylon sign be considered 1 sign, therefore Section 4.11 is not relevantXXXX for 36 months; it was seconded by Ms. Anderson and was approved unanimously. (34:00) Seeing no further debate or discussion, Mr. Goggins made a motion to CXXX allow 149 sqft; it was seconded by Ms. Anderson and was approved unanimously. Dulce Hernandez Application #3041 59-61 Huron St Special Permit Section 4.306(F) & Variance from Section 4.306(F)(b) Request for Special Permit and Variance to allow construction of 6-foot-tall solid fencing in the front yard on the property line along Superior Street. Chair Ingegni read the staff analysis into the record. Dulce Hernandez, 61 Huron St came forward to discuss the application. She is requesting the fence for privacy and the safety of her children and dog. People drive into her driveway unexpectedly by mistake and to turn around. She wants to keep the kids in the yard. Mr. Goggins suggested lowering the fence to 4ft. She was unable to find a 4ft fence at the store where she looked, but members noted it is available. He is not in favor of a 6ft solid fence right on the property line; 60/40 solid might work. She has a toddler, an older child, and a small dog; they could all climb through or over the fence. Mr. FitzGerald noted there is another property that has a 6ft fence. This is a dead-end street; there’s not a lot of traffic around this area. Seeing no further debate or discussion, Mr. Goggins made a motion to grant the special permit under section 4.306(F) to allow a 6-foot-tall fence in the front yard; it was seconded by Ms. Anderson. Voting in favor of the motion were Chair Al Ingegni, John Fitzgerald, Tom Goggins, Esther Anderson, and Allyson Holmes. The motion passed with 5 affirmative votes. 1. If the rights authorized by the Special Permit are not exercised within two (2) years of the date of the granting of such Special Permit, they shall lapse and may be re- established only after notice and a new hearing. 2. The applicant would be subject to all other federal, state and local rules and regulations not specifically covered by the granting of this variance and special permit. Page 3 of 4 S:\DCD\Planning Division\ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS\Meeting Minutes\2025\5-21-2025\Minutes 5-21-2025.docx Mr. Goggins made a motion to deny the variance; it was seconded by Ms. Anderson and was approved unanimously. Voting in favor of the motion to deny were Chair Al Ingegni, John Fitzgerald, Tom Goggins, Esther Anderson, and Allyson Holmes. The motion passed with 5 affirmative votes and the Variance was denied. New Business: None. Old Business: None. Adjourn Mr. Goggins made a motion to adjourn at 8:20pm; it was seconded by Ms. Anderson and was approved unanimously. Submitted by Ted Kozlowski, Staff Page 4 of 4 S:\DCD\Planning Division\ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS\Meeting Minutes\2025\5-21-2025\Minutes 5-21-2025.docx