Rochester’s Zoning Board of Appeals on January 9 granted a Special Permit for multiple signage at the ExtraSpace Self-Storage facility proposed for 667 County Road.
Project representative Joseph Sanda told the board last month that the developer is seeking a special permit to allow the erecting of six signs on the property. The biggest of these will be a 37-feet-long by four-feet-high sign proclaiming the company name that will face the Route 495 south-bound exit approaching Exit 2 to Rochester. The first sign will be placed at the beginning of the property. Four others will direct customers who have entered the five-story facility. The only proposed sign above the 50 square-foot size limit allowed in town bylaw is the 164-square-foot sign that will face Route 495 in order to draw customers to the facility.
Zoning Board Chair David Arancio led the response that the panel wanted to see exactly what those signs and the building lighting will look like before approving the special permit. The January 9 meeting satisfied the board on these points. Project Representative Joseph Sanda presented drawings of the different faces of the building and explained where each sign will be placed. He said there will be a ground-mounted sign on County Road, another at the northeast corner of the building facing toward Route 495, another on the east along the length of the property naming the property owner, a sign on the eastern side denoting the drive-through and loading area, another directional sign donating the office, and a directional sign donating the entrance to the complex’s smaller building.
Board members focused their questions on the brightness of those signs. Chair David Arnacio said he had used a light meter to measure the light intensity of the signs at the company’s similar location in Dedham. The result was a measurement of three-foot light candles. The developer’s Highland Development Managing Partner Adam Hird said the light company’s report is that the sign emits zero light candles perpendicular to the side of the building, no immeasurable illumination.
Arancio seemed convinced the difference was negligible. But before pressing for the approval vote, he noted this is the town’s only chance to get the limits of this permit correct. “We get one bite of the apple here,” he said. “It will be hard to criticize down the line to satisfy a complaint.”
He added that the board takes the rural appearance of Rochester very seriously. “Keep that in mind going forward,” he said.
In other action, administrator Andreia Lacerda reported no new petitions have been filed for the board’s next meeting. No new meeting date was set by adjournment.
Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals
By: Michael J. DeCicco