Office of Outdoor Advertising
Public Meeting
February 13, 2014 11:00 AM
Ten Park Plaza Conference Rm 5 & 6
Boston, MA 02116
Present:
Edward Farley, Executive Director Chris Quinn, Esq., Counsel
P R O C E E D I N G S 1
2
EDWARD FARLEY: Good morning everyone. 3
I would like to call this meeting to order. Today is 4
February 13, 2014. It is 11:00 AM. My name is Edward 5
Farley. I am the Director for the Office of Outdoor 6
Advertising. To my left is Chris Quinn, our legal 7
counsel. If you haven’t already done so, please sign 8
in at the side of the table. Also there are agendas, 9
and abbreviated minutes from the January 9, 2014 OOA 10
Meeting. 11
With that, we will have a review of the 12
minutes from the January 9th meeting. Are there any 13
comments on the minutes? Hearing no comment, the 14
minutes from January 9th are adopted. 15
Moving on to first agenda item, 16
application for new license from Outdoor Properties, 17
32 Wild Grove Lane, Longmeadow, MA. For the record, 18
this application has been reviewed, is in order, and 19
is accompanied with record of fees and paperwork. Is 20
there someone representing Outdoor Properties here 21
this morning? 22
Okay, again, I have reviewed this 23
application. Is there any public comment regarding 24
this license application? Hearing no public comment 1
we are going to grant license to Outdoor Properties, 2
Inc. 3
Moving on to the next order of 4
business. We have an application for transfer of 5
permits from Agnoli Sign Company to Outdoor 6
Properties. There is a total of seven permits. 7
Again, this application has been reviewed and is in 8
order. Is there any public comment regarding the 9
transfer from Agnoli Sign Company to Outdoor 10
Properties? Hearing no comment, these transfers are 11
approved. 12
Our third item is a transfer of permit 13
from Clear Channel Outdoor to Logan Communications. 14
Again, this application has been reviewed, and is in 15
order. Is there any comment relative to this 16
transfer? Okay, hearing no comment the transfer is 17
approved. 18
Moving onto our fourth item, 19
application for electronic permit from Splash Media. 20
This application is 2014D004 and 2014D005. This is to 21
convert an existing static board over to an electronic 22
one. For the record, municipal notification was 23
received by the City of Lowell on December 23, 2013. 24
Is the applicant present today? 1
EDWARD O’SULLIVAN: Edward O’Sullivan 2
representing Splash Media. 3
ED FARLEY: Okay, is there anyone here 4
representing the municipality? Okay, Mr. O’Sullivan, 5
can I ask, was certified mail sent to abutters within 6
500-feet, at least 30 days prior to submitting this 7
application. 8
EDWARD O’SULLIVAN: That is my 9
understanding. Yes it was. 10
ED FARLEY: And this is the letter I 11
received yesterday? 12
EDWARD O’SULLIVAN: Yes. That is a 13
copy that was sent to you. 14
ED FARLEY: Okay. Are there any 15
abutters present this morning? Mr. O’Sullivan, did 16
you receive any comment either written or otherwise 17
from any abutters after the notification was mailed? 18
EDWARD O’SULLIVAN: No, none. There 19
was also a public notice from the Lowell Zoning Board 20
of Appeals which nobody attended in opposition. 21
ED FARLEY: Okay, and this permit was 22
issued via special permit from the City of Lowell? 23
EDWARD O’SULLIVAN: That is correct. 24
ED FARLEY: And that was recently 1
updated on January 17? 2
EDWARD O’SULLIVAN: Yes, it was. 3
ED FARLEY: Okay. Chris Chaves, will 4
you give us a –- Jason Bean did the inspection, but he 5
is from Western Mass so he is not here this morning. 6
CHRIS CHAVES: This is a proposed 7
digital conversion of current permits 2008074 and 8
2008075. Located at 41 Mile Avenue in Lowell. The 9
two businesses Jason has to fit the requirement are 10
Alpine Butcher and Mobile Gas Station. This current 11
sign is within an on-ramp but due to Lowell’s 12
population being 105,000 people fits it well beyond 13
the 50,000-population requirement. Other than that 14
there are no other issues or concerns for this site. 15
It is compliant with digital. 16
ED FARLEY: Are there any comments from 17
either the District Office or Traffic Operations. 18
STEVE TIMMINS: Yes. 19
ED FARLEY: Mr. Timmins. 20
STEVE TIMMINS: Steve Timmins 21
representing Neil Bordeaux, State Traffic Engineer. 22
We have looked at the location and determined that a 23
formal traffic study will not be required. However, 24
we would request that once the new displays are in 1
place that the District Office monitor traffic 2
conditions to determine if there is a distraction to 3
Route 3 traffic given the proximity of the entrance 4
and exit ramps to the board. 5
ED FARLEY: Okay, thank you, Mr. 6
Timmins. 7
CHRIS QUINN: So the District will do 8
the monitoring. 9
STEVE TIMMINS: Yes. 10
CHRIS QUINN: Okay. 11
ED FARLEY: Is there any further public 12
comment? Okay, hearing none applications 2014D004 and 13
2014D005 will be taken under advisement. Just for 14
clarification we did notice, Mr. O’Sullivan, there is 15
a curfew set by the city and it looked like the 16
numbers were inversed. We have 6 to 12 and I’m 17
curious is the curfew 6 AM to 12 PM? 18
EDWARD O’SULLIVAN: I will have to get 19
clarification for you and get back to you. 20
ED FARLEY: Okay. The application says 21
hours of operation is 12 AM to 6 AM, so I’m thinking 22
that is probably -- 23
EDWARD O’SULLIVAN: Let me get that 24
clarified for you. 1
ED FARLEY: Okay. Moving on to 2
electronic permit application number 2014D006, RSA 3
Media, for a proposed conversion and static board to 4
electronic in Auburn, MA. For the record, municipal 5
notification was sent out on December 17, 2013. Is 6
the applicant present this morning? 7
JAMES LACK: Yes sir. James Lack and 8
Susan Eastman for RSA Media. 9
ED FARLEY: Is there anyone 10
representing the Town of Auburn here today? Okay. 11
Mr. Lack, was certified mail notice to abutters within 12
500-feet sent out at least 30 days prior to this 13
application being submitted? 14
JAMES LACK: That is my understanding. 15
It was also in the Worcester Telegram for two weeks. 16
ED FARLEY: Okay. Do you by chance 17
have a copy of the letter that was sent for the 18
record? 19
JAMES LACK: Yes, I do and a list of 20
the abutters. 21
ED FARLEY: Okay. Thank you. 22
JAMES LACK: It also has the newspaper 23
notice as well. 24
ED FARLEY: Are there any abutters 1
present this morning? Okay, Mr. Lack, did you receive 2
any written notification from abutters regarding this 3
application? 4
JAMES LACK: No sir. 5
ED FARLEY: Okay. 6
JAMES LACK: And no abutters appeared 7
at the Zoning Board. 8
ED FARLEY: Okay, and who did the 9
inspection? 10
MARC PLANTE: I did. 11
ED FARLEY: Okay, Mr. Plante, can you 12
give us a rundown of the inspection. 13
MARC PLANTE: This is an existing 14
monopole, single faced, it is facing Interstate Route 15
90 which is the Massachusetts Turnpike. It is for a 16
digital conversion. It is a static board now, permit 17
number 2008027. The two businesses are located in a 18
commercial character zone. The two businesses would 19
be Casey Storage and (inaudible phrase) Manufacturing. 20
There are no issues with spacing for other signs and 21
there are no conservation or park issues. It is 22
compliant for this conversion. 23
ED FARLEY: Okay. In essence we are 24
just looking to replace the static face with an 1
electronic one? We are not looking to increase the 2
height or -- 3
JAMES LACK: Yes. It is exactly the 4
same height nothing except change the face from static 5
to digital. 6
ED FARLEY: Okay. Any public comment 7
regarding this application this morning? Okay, 8
hearing none we are going to take application 2014D006 9
under advisement. Our next applicant is Cove Outdoor. 10
We have an application for a new structure in the City 11
of Peabody. Applications number 2014D007 and 12
2014D008. Is the applicant present this morning? 13
EDWARD O’SULLIVAN: Yes. 14
ED FARLEY: For the record, Mr. 15
O’Sullivan is wearing a couple of different hats 16
today. 17
EDWARD O’SULLIVAN: Yes. 18
ED FARLEY: Okay. For the record, 19
municipal notification was sent out on December 17, 20
2013. Do we have a representative from the City of 21
Peabody here this morning? 22
My apologies, on the last application, 23
I don’t want to get ahead of myself, but did we have 24
any comments from the District Office or Traffic 1
Operations? 2
STEVE TIMMINS: Yes. Boston Traffic 3
Engineering has determined that a formal traffic study 4
nor monitoring of the district at this location be 5
required. 6
ED FARLEY: Okay. Thank you, Mr. 7
Timmins. All right, Okay, Mr. O’Sullivan, can I ask, 8
was certified mail to abutters within 500-feet sent at 9
least 30 days prior to the submittal of the 10
application? 11
EDWARD O’SULLIVAN: Yes it was. 12
ED FARLEY: Okay. Are there any 13
abutters here this morning? Mr. O’Sullivan, did you 14
receive any letters or feedback regarding the new sign 15
build? 16
EDWARD O’SULLIVAN: No feedback, other 17
than public comment by City Council. They were all in 18
favor. 19
ED FARLEY: Okay. Was this special 20
permit or variance? 21
EDWARD O’SULLIVAN: Special permit. 22
ED FARLEY: Okay, ten/nothing vote. 23
EDWARD O’SULLIVAN: Yes sir. 24
ED FARLEY: Okay, who did the 1
inspection? Mr. Chaves, can you give us an overview 2
of the inspection. 3
CHRIS CHAVES: Certainly. This is a 4
proposed new build located behind the Extended Stay 5
America, 200 Jubilee Drive in Peabody. Proposed to 6
face Route 128 North and South. The area is of 7
business character. The two business for the 8
requirement are Extended Stay America Hotel and 9
Analogic (sounds like) Corporation. There are no 10
spacing’s between other signs in the area or parks, 11
etcetera. This site is in compliance for digital. 12
ED FARLEY: Okay. Mr. Timmins, are 13
there any comments from Traffic Operations regarding 14
this proposed location? 15
STEVE TIMMINS: Yes. Regarding the 16
Northbound face we are concerned the moderate to high 17
potential for distraction given everything that is 18
happening in that area. Not only the 128 Main line 19
dropping a lane but the various on and off-ramps in 20
that immediate area. So for the northbound face we 21
recommend a formal traffic study be conducted. 22
For the southbound face we have no 23
issues and don’t see the need for either a formal 24
traffic study or monitoring by the District Office. 1
ED FARLEY: Okay, thank you. Any 2
additional public comment this morning? Mr. 3
O’Sullivan, I can share with you at a later time what 4
a formal traffic study would require to move forward 5
with the issuance of permit. For the time being I am 6
going to say that applications 2014D007 and 2014D008 7
are taken under advisement. 8
Okay, moving on to our last 9
applications Clear Channel 2014D009 and 2014D010. 10
Proposed conversion of a static board to electronic in 11
the Town of Wakefield. For the record, municipal 12
notification was received by the Town of Wakefield on 13
January 9, 2014. First, is the applicant present this 14
morning? 15
JOHN PELRINE: Yes, John Pelrine, Clear 16
Channel. 17
ED FARLEY: Okay, is there anyone 18
representing the Town of Wakefield? Okay, Mr. 19
Pelrine, can I ask, was certified mail to abutters 20
sent within 500-feet at least 30 days prior to 21
submittal of the application. 22
JOHN PELRINE: Yes, they were. 23
ED FARLEY: Okay. For the record, I do 24
have a copy of that letter on file. Did you receive 1
any comment or feedback from that letter? 2
JOHN PELRINE: No comments. It was a 3
unanimous vote for a variance. 4
ED FARLEY: Okay, are there any 5
abutters present this morning? Okay, and who did the 6
inspection? 7
CHRIS CHAVES: I did. 8
ED FARLEY: Okay, Mr. Chaves, can you 9
give us an overview of the inspection? 10
CHRIS CHAVES: Yes sir. This is a 11
proposed digital conversion with two current tri-12
vision boards located facing Interstate 95 North and 13
South. The area is of commercial use. Again the two 14
businesses that fit the criteria are Jordan’s 15
Furniture and Fuddruckers. The existing permits are 16
80255 and 80256 and again, this meets all the criteria 17
and is compliance with digital. 18
ED FARLEY: Okay, is there any comment 19
this morning from Traffic Operations relative to this 20
proposed location? 21
STEVE TIMMINS: Yes, regarding the 22
northbound face we are concerned that there is a 23
moderate potential for distraction from traffic 24
merging onto 95 North from North Ave. This is in our 1
opinion exasperated by the fact that there is an 2
existing adjacent electronic display for the IMAX 3
Theatre. So that having the two displays in 4
conjunction with the proximity to the entrance ramp. 5
Therefore for the northbound face we recommend that a 6
formal traffic study be conducted. 7
Regarding the southbound face we see 8
minimal potential for distraction at best. So no 9
traffic study or District monitoring will be needed. 10
ED FARLEY: Thank you. 11
CHRIS QUINN: Is the sign the same 12
height as the existing display? 13
JOHN PELRINE: Are you asking me? 14
CHRIS QUINN: Yes. 15
JOHN PELRINE: It is an on-premise tri-16
vision for Jordan’s Furniture. For the record, it is 17
not a digital sign, it is a tri-vision. 18
CHRIS QUINN: Right. Is the height 19
going to be the same? 20
JOHN PELRINE: I believe that is 21
probably higher than our existing sign because this is 22
up on a hill. 23
(Inaudible phrases -- too many 24
speakers) 1
JOHN PELRINE: Our sign is staying the 2
same. 3
CHRIS QUINN: The same. Okay. 4
ED FARLEY: 57-feet. 5
JOHN PELRINE: Yes. 6
STEVEN ROSS: May I make a comment? 7
ED FARLEY: Sure. 8
STEVEN ROSS: Steven Ross, Clear 9
Channel Outdoor. I would suggest a traffic survey 10
study is not needed because it is already a changeable 11
sign which is a tri-vision. 12
ED FARLEY: Okay. 13
STEVE TIMMINS: Our concern is the 14
proximity of two similar signs that are changeable 15
displays one is a tri-vision, the other is a full 16
digital in close proximity and in close proximity to 17
the entrance ramp to 95 northbound. 18
ED FARLEY: Is there any further 19
comment or discussion on these applications. Okay, 20
application 2014D009 and 2014D010 will be taken under 21
advisement. Noted for the record items, are there any 22
comment. Any public comment at all this morning? 23
Okay, hearing no public comment, it is 11:21 and this 24
meeting is adjourned. Thank you. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
(Whereupon, the proceedings were 17
concluded on February 13, 2012 at 11:21 a.m.) 18
C E R T I F I C A T E
I, Tammy A. Hillery, do hereby certify that the foregoing record is a true and accurate transcription of the proceedings in the above-captioned matter to the best of my skill and ability.
_________________________________________ Tammy A. Hillery
**All names not provided were spelled phonetically to the best of my ability.
