Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Dro topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board sends 2024 DRO revision recommendations to governing body after discussion on rooftop amenities and noise
Summary
The Summit Planning Board voted unanimously Feb. 24 to transmit a package of recommended changes to the city's Development Regulations Ordinance to the governing body. Board members debated rooftop amenity limits, rooftop lighting height and the town's noise ordinance before voting to forward the draft for consideration.
The Summit Planning Board voted unanimously on Feb. 24 to transmit its 2024 Development Regulations Ordinance revision recommendations to the City Council for further consideration.
The revisions, prepared with input from Burgess Associates, update standards for rooftop amenities, rooftop-mounted lighting and related design controls. The board's action sends the packet to the governing body for formal review and a later consistency check with the master plan.
Joe Burgess, principal at Burgess Associates, told the board the packet is intended as an annual review that the governing body may adopt or modify. "You will be getting this back for a final review," Burgess said, describing the transmission as the next step before a consistency review.
Board members focused discussion on three recurring topics in the revisions: - Rooftop amenities: Several members said a fixed-percentage cap (the draft sets a 40% rooftop coverage limit for amenity spaces) is a useful baseline but noted site visibility varies. Council member Delia Hamlet said a literal percentage can be overly restrictive in locations where a rooftop is not visible from public vantage points and suggested allowing deviations where appropriate. - Rooftop lighting height: One board member questioned the draft's 10-foot maximum for rooftop-mounted lighting fixtures above the roof deck. Burgess said typical fixtures are often 12 to 14 feet tall; the board agreed the standard will warrant a site-by-site review and may be adjusted. - Noise and enforcement: Hamlet raised enforcement concerns, noting the police department currently lacks a decibel meter to verify complaints. She urged that any reference to noise standards in the DRO acknowledge existing enforcement limitations and align with police and health-department practice.
Hamlet also described a site-specific noise mitigation example at the BMS campus, where bafflers were added to rooftop HVAC units and reduced a longstanding humming complaint. Burgess and staff said the DRO language can reference the municipal noise ordinance and that the board and governing body can pursue a separate, more technical noise-ordinance update if needed.
The board voted to transmit the package to the governing body by roll call; the motion passed with nine votes in favor and no votes against. Chairman Steven Spur said the governing body will review and return the package for the planning board's consistency check.
The board also discussed creating a small subcommittee to continue DRO work in 2025. Burgess and staff said the statutory consistency review process will allow additional public input and later amendments.
The planning board's transmitted packet will be considered by the City Council and returned to the board for final consistency review before any ordinance changes take effect.
