Newcastle voters rejected a new sign ordinance 83 to 23 and one of two land use ordinance amendments during a 2 3/4-hour annual town meeting June 17.
The major changes in the sign ordinance were allowances for “internally-illuminated” signs in certain parts of town and an increase in the maximum size of signs in some areas.
The ordinance would have allowed signs that cause “direct lighting or glare onto public ways or adjacent properties,” which current rules do not allow.
An internally-illuminated sign is a sign wherein the light source comes from within the sign. A famous example is McDonald’s golden arch or, in Newcastle, the Maritime Farms sign.
Christopher Rice was a member of the sign ordinance committee that drafted the ordinance at the request of the Newcastle Board of Selectmen.
“The end result is not what you have before you,” Rice said.
The selectmen, after a review of the draft, made a series of changes to make the ordinance more business-friendly.
“I find the changes that were made are significant enough to speak out against this ordinance tonight,” Rice said.
The ordinance before voters would fail to accomplish an important part of its stated purpose: to preserve “the character, history and unique qualities of the town,” Rice said.
Newcastle Board of Selectmen Chairman Brian Foote defended the ordinance.
“We have always had lit signs downtown,” Foote said, citing his 24 years as a Newcastle resident. Maritime Farms has had internally-illuminated signs for many years and the old service station next to the town office also had one. “That’s the history I’ve seen,” Foote said.
“Today, if you drive downtown, we have four interior-lit signs on Main Street,” Foote said. “We have I don’t know how many on Route 1.”
“You have to remember you’re affecting the businesses in town if you tell them they have to take their signs down,” he said.
Some residents said the board’s changes to the ordinance did not take into account the hard work of the committee to reach a compromise. “Why would anyone volunteer to work on a committee when you do that?” said Leah Sprague.
“We do really appreciate all of our volunteers,” Foote said. “I would say 90 percent of this ordinance didn’t change. It’s what we were presented.”
Land Use Ordinance Review Committee Chairman Rob Nelson argued against the ordinance.
“I think this proposed ordinance has a lot of good ideas in it, but I don’t think it’s ready for the town,” Nelson said. “We do need a new ordinance, just not this one as written.”
Some residents said the town should enforce the existing ordinance before it writes a new one. “I just wonder why we pass all these ordinances and we don’t enforce them,” Tom Stevens said to widespread applause.
Jenny Mayher asked what the town would do about the illegal signs at The Bank of Maine and Maritime Farms.
“If this proposed sign ordinance does not pass, the town will have to enforce its current ordinance,” said Selectman Ben Frey. “That is our legal responsibility.”
A number of older non-conforming signs, most along Route 1, would be able to stay until they require replacement, town attorney Peter Drum said.
Residents rejected the ordinance by a margin of almost 4 to 1.
The voters also rejected a land use ordinance amendment that would have eliminated setbacks in the Village Center District.
The change would have allowed downtown property owners to build to their boundary lines, and could eventually have resulted in development similar to downtown Damariscotta, with buildings close together and abutting the sidewalk.
The amendment failed 56 to 43.
The voters approved another amendment to the land use ordinance, which requires a first-floor commercial use in the Village Center District, 70 to 34 despite vocal opposition.
Advocates for the change have said it would ensure the downtown area remains economically viable and, again like Damariscotta, create a downtown that enables and encourages shoppers to walk from business to business.
Morrison Bonpasse argued against the amendment. “We don’t need to be like Damariscotta,” Bonpasse said. “I think it’s anti-capitalistic, anti-business, to require a business to invest in a business on the first floor that doesn’t really work.”
Mary Chase also expressed dissatisfaction with the proposal. “I wonder why we can’t leave it the way it is,” Chase said. “I don’t think business is necessarily the way to go.”
George Shaw said he did not want to discourage ground floor apartments, which are more accessible for people with mobility issues.
Others defended the change.
“I would like to see us encourage local businesses to locate downtown in a walkable environment,” Jenny Mayher said. “That creates economic development, that creates a strong tax base, and it makes people want to live here.”
Selectman Ben Frey, in response to comments from multiple residents who said they do not want to change the downtown, said the change “does actually protect our current downtown the way it is.”
The majority of the properties in the district already have first-floor commercial uses. The amendment would require the 75 Main St. building known as the Newcastle Harbor House to follow suit, according to Drum. The apartment building known as Stetson House and a couple of other houses would be grandfathered.
Eva Frey said the community has displayed strong support for such a change in a series of committee meetings.
“Initially I did not [support the requirement] but it does make sense and it would give us, at some point in time, 30, 40 years in the future, something that would resemble a downtown,” she said.
The three ordinance questions dominated the meeting. Voters passed the other 27 questions on the warrant with little debate or opposition, including 11 questions regarding the $1.38 million municipal budget.
The figure is a decrease of $1668 or 0.12 percent from the 2012-2013 budget.
The Newcastle Fire Company did not hold its traditional dinner before the meeting, but plans to resume the practice next year, Fire Chief Clayton Huntley said.